In defense of SFA
Allen Kim
dominating the opinions posted. Opinions to the contrary seem to be drowned
out by the sheer volume of posts by this "elite."
Now don't think of this as flamebait, but I've decided to say why I think SFA
is better than SSF2T, and defend some of the aspects of SFA that people want
taken out in SFA2:
- Let's face it: SSF2T may be the best of the original SF2 series, but by the
time of its release, the SF2 series already lost all but the most hardcore
of players. Yes, there were crowds around the SSF2T machines when it first
came out, but these crowds died out very quickly when they realized that
there was nothing really novel in the game, except for Akuma. Super moves
were hardly used, since the meter charged up too slowly, and when it does,
the opponent merely becomes more defensive.
- SFA was a welcome change to the old SF2 series. Even though the graphics
took a step backwards, it still grew on you (to take the words of Tom Cannon
straight from his posts back then).
- While SSF2T only had one new character, Akuma, SFA introduced Adon, Guy,
Sodom, Rose, Bird-pooh, and even Dan. New styles of playing, and new
tactics to defend against.
- How many times have you jumped backwards to get away from an opponent, only
to have him throw a projectile which hits you before you land? How many
times have you jumped straight up, only to realize that the projectile that
your opponent threw was a lot slower that you expected? If these are the
faults of an unskilled player, so be it, but then again, this also
encourages cowardly tactics where all a player has to do is throw various
speeds of projectiles and entice a non-projectile player to jump forward,
thus opening him up to an anti-air move. SSF2T still encourages this
(although characters like Vega and Balrog are made to smack these players
away because of their short jump hangtime).
That's one reason why SFA has airblocking, so that players don't have to
take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
projectile.
- Chain combos open up a new door to combos and tactics. Yeah, I know, there
are videos that show difficult but killer combos available in the SF2 series,
but these combos only belonged to the priveleged few characters lucky enough
to exploit them, like Guile. What does that say in terms of character
balance in SSF2T?
In SFA, chain combos can level the playing field, plus they allow for more
variety in playing styles of characters. For example, Guy is the king of
chains, while Birdie and M.Bison don't need them. (For those of you lucky
enough to have a SFA2 beta machine near you, how good is Guy, now that
chain combos are gone?)
- Alpha Counters are also an excellent way for a player to reverse the tide of
a match. Yeah, I know, this does encourage turtling, but that's only a flaw
in its implementation in SFA, not a fundamental flaw with AC's. All you
have to do is make AC's more difficult to time, or make them take up all of
you meter, or anything else that discourage AC-fests.
- SFA does have a lower learning curve, so that Capcom can try to pull in new
players. Of course, this angers the "elite" who spent most of their money
on the SF2 series practicing until they become the best in their area, only
to feel threatened with a game that even novices can learn and become good
at without spending too much money.
To those guys, I'd like to say, "Hello?!?" Why do you think the MK series
is so popular, like MK3? Because after MK3 lures all of the youngsters with
the eye candy, it presents such a no-brainer game engine that these newbies
won't become easily discouraged by a difficult engine.
Now SFA is nowhere near MK3 in terms of simplicity, but the diehards are
still complaining that Capcom is trying to cater to novices too much. At
least SFA has a learning curve, short as it is. Skilled SFA players don't
have to worry about any newbie choosing a cheesy character and winning
without displaying any hint of skill.
However, with SSF2T, any non-SF2 player who wants to get into this game will
have to spend lots time and money getting used to the game. There's no
incentive to do just that, since to them, SSF2T represents nothing new or
novel.
Now that SFA2 are in the final stages of tweaking before its release, most of
the messages on this newsgroup seem to be saying, "Get rid of air blocking!
Get rid of chain combos! Get rid of Alpha Counters!" Gee, what do you want,
another SSF2T? That's it, just more of the same.
I for one appreciated the freedom of chain combos in SFA. I liked airblocking;
less boring ground games where each player tries to poke the other. And
there's little that's more satisfying than interrupting an opponent's rhythm
by smacking them with an Alpha Counter.
Of course, there are flaws in these new features, but why kill them when you
can just fix them? I for one am hoping that SFA2 will not turn into yet
another SSF2T (even though chains have already been axed).
--
Allen Kim /|
___________________________________________| |
/___________________________________________|8888888888888]
| |
ak...@cornell.edu |/
"Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit,
which is the word of God." - Ephesians 6:17
Allen J Klein
Allen K...@cornell.edu
> take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
> projectile.
Good analogy. It's a hard position to defend, though, because Mr.
Painter will say "What? Jumping over varying speed fireballs with Honda
is easy... I was doing it since the game came out. Honda has always
perfected Ryu because jumping over those fireballs is a lot easier to do
than sitting across the screen throwing them. In fact, to better
balance the game, IMO, they need to make Honda's jump a LOT lower, make
his sprite bigger, and make the hang time longer." (hehehe) Oh well...
Hmm... hopping FBs is actually kind of in the realm of overheads.
Simplistic/tedious/stupid skill sets unrelated to overall gameplay which
are incredibly important to learn.
> - SFA does have a lower learning curve, so that Capcom can try to pull in new
> players. Of course, this angers the "elite" who spent most of their money
> on the SF2 series practicing until they become the best in their area, only
> to feel threatened with a game that even novices can learn and become good
> at without spending too much money.
> [it's good that SFA isn't another SSF2T, etc]
Ok, but don't you think it's possible to put new stuff into a game which
doesn't simultaneously destroy the learning curve?
There have been a couple of posts chastising folks on this group for
"wishing that SFA2 were another SSF2T" and I sort of agree with that
thinking, but I don't see how -NEW STUFF- and -GOOD LEARNING CURVE- have
to be mutually exclusive. (wait, did I use that expression correctly?)
Vampire Hunter added a shitload of new stuff and it did not cut the
learning curve as drastically as in SFA. VH already has a good chain
combo system, air block system, and block cancel (AC) system. Shit, did
someone erase the Capcom designers' memory or something?
jk
--
0UY0T allen jamie klein S1HT0D yow! 3MT3LU0Y yan...@cmu.edu 0DYHW
Seth James Killian
>It seems like there are a handful of people on this newsgroup who are
>dominating the opinions posted. Opinions to the contrary seem to be drowned
>out by the sheer volume of posts by this "elite."
I agree. There's nothing worse than hearing someone who knows what
they're talking about speak.
>Now don't think of this as flamebait, but I've decided to say why I think SFA
>is better than SSF2T, and defend some of the aspects of SFA that people want
>taken out in SFA2:
I don't regard it as flamebait, but rather a good instantiation of
your general wrongness.
>- Let's face it: SSF2T may be the best of the original SF2 series, but by the
> time of its release, the SF2 series already lost all but the most hardcore
> of players. Yes, there were crowds around the SSF2T machines when it first
Yes, undoubtedly less people played SSF2T than did previous SFs. Not
much room for subjectivity here; that is (I would think) a fact.
> came out, but these crowds died out very quickly when they realized that
> there was nothing really novel in the game, except for Akuma. Super moves
> were hardly used, since the meter charged up too slowly, and when it does,
> the opponent merely becomes more defensive.
Again, mostly true. While I could "quibble" with you about how to
properly use the SSF2T SCs or somesuch, I'm happy to move on to your other
points.
>- SFA was a welcome change to the old SF2 series. Even though the graphics
> took a step backwards, it still grew on you (to take the words of Tom Cannon
> straight from his posts back then).
"A welcome change". Purely subjective. To some, like yourself,
obviously true. To others, not true. As for being a step backwards, both
graphically and otherwise, I agree. Perhaps it grew on you. So will mold,
if you hang around it long enough.
>- While SSF2T only had one new character, Akuma, SFA introduced Adon, Guy,
> Sodom, Rose, Bird-pooh, and even Dan. New styles of playing, and new
> tactics to defend against.
Technically, SSF2T could be claimed to have 33 characters, if you
include the Super versions. Although that would be a bit of a stretch, I
don't need it to show that you're completely wrong here. Although SFA
introduced several "new" characters, it is also obviously guilty of the
removal of many more. Even among the choices about what characters were
removed, you can still criticize it. They left clearly disproportionate
numbers of the hated FB/UC characters and took out their more novel designs
(like Dhalsim, or Honda). Also, the "newness" of the new characters wore
off pretty quickly, especially in cases like Sodom, who was just a terribly
implemented design. Others like Rose, who while more interesting in herself,
were reduced to childishly dumb tactics because of their disgusting
effectiveness. SFA clearly loses in whatever value you assign character
depth/variety/number/etc...
>- How many times have you jumped backwards to get away from an opponent, only
> to have him throw a projectile which hits you before you land? How many
Umm, practically never, because that is a retarded scrub move. Jump
backwards to get away? I am really having trouble thinking of a time when
this is ever your best bet, even outside of FB considerations.
> times have you jumped straight up, only to realize that the projectile that
> your opponent threw was a lot slower that you expected? If these are the
> faults of an unskilled player, so be it, but then again, this also
> encourages cowardly tactics where all a player has to do is throw various
> speeds of projectiles and entice a non-projectile player to jump forward,
> thus opening him up to an anti-air move. SSF2T still encourages this
> (although characters like Vega and Balrog are made to smack these players
> away because of their short jump hangtime).
This FB "problem" is clearly overstated here. Other than characters
like Honda, who really has a ton of trouble with FBs? Some examples beyond
Honda will be required to convince me that this terrible scourge alone
justifies air blocking.
> That's one reason why SFA has airblocking, so that players don't have to
> take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
> projectile.
Nice image, but unfortunately it does not apply. Try some examples
of the insurmountable FB.
>- Chain combos open up a new door to combos and tactics. Yeah, I know, there
> are videos that show difficult but killer combos available in the SF2 series,
> but these combos only belonged to the priveleged few characters lucky enough
> to exploit them, like Guile. What does that say in terms of character
> balance in SSF2T?
The door opened up by chains is leads only to scrub-land. There
are plenty of non-difficult but relatively "Killer" combos in SSF2T, and I
really hope you didn't have to watch a video to see them. Belonged only
to a few characters? Well, yes, Guile has basically infinite combos, but
the opportunity for these is, more or less, 0%. What does that say for
character balance? Good question! Do you have an answer? Guile, god of
combos, was never considered one of the strongest characters in SSF2T. In
fact, those who were were relatively weak in the combo dept. Take Dhalsim.
Killer combos? Not hardly. It took *tactics*, rather than some 4-button
tap series to win. Scary thought, I know. Fei Long? Combos out his butt,
but he is still weak as a character.
> In SFA, chain combos can level the playing field, plus they allow for more
> variety in playing styles of characters. For example, Guy is the king of
> chains, while Birdie and M.Bison don't need them. (For those of you lucky
> enough to have a SFA2 beta machine near you, how good is Guy, now that
> chain combos are gone?)
This combo talk is just totally confused. Guy as king of chains?
Sure, but that had very little to do with why he was such a strong character.
Chain combos did not level the playing field, they just simplified it.
>- Alpha Counters are also an excellent way for a player to reverse the tide of
> a match. Yeah, I know, this does encourage turtling, but that's only a flaw
> in its implementation in SFA, not a fundamental flaw with AC's. All you
> have to do is make AC's more difficult to time, or make them take up all of
> you meter, or anything else that discourage AC-fests.
While I have yet to see ACs in a totally positive light, I agree they
are not a priori bad. But if this is a defense of SFA (see the title), then
you need to defend their SFA implementation, which was garbage. Many possible
decent solutions. The jury is still out.
>- SFA does have a lower learning curve, so that Capcom can try to pull in new
> players. Of course, this angers the "elite" who spent most of their money
> on the SF2 series practicing until they become the best in their area, only
> to feel threatened with a game that even novices can learn and become good
> at without spending too much money.
Yes. As an "elite" I am "angered" by novices who are now better than
me. I feel very threatened. You can say this, and it makes "elite" (re:
those who think SSF2T was better) look bad and childish, but it has no basis
in fact. I have no problem with a game that allows you to be "competitive"
without a major investment (Primal Rage was a great example of this). Further,
you assume that the SSF2T lovers would be "angry" because they lose at SFA. I
think this is almost across the board 100% wrong. The SSF2T elite generally
kick ass at SFA, but they don't like it. They win for stupid and banal
reasons, and thoughtful tactics take a back-seat to elementary combos and
guessing games in terms of effectiveness.
> To those guys, I'd like to say, "Hello?!?" Why do you think the MK series
> is so popular, like MK3? Because after MK3 lures all of the youngsters with
> the eye candy, it presents such a no-brainer game engine that these newbies
> won't become easily discouraged by a difficult engine.
So what? What does this have to do with game quality? I can see
*why* Capcom did a lot of what they did with SFA: it attracts more players
(more scrubs). That much is obvious and uncontested. I just *also* think
they made a crappy game. Defend SFA on its own terms, not in economic
ones, which no game-*player* (not producer/developer) is interested in.
> Now SFA is nowhere near MK3 in terms of simplicity, but the diehards are
> still complaining that Capcom is trying to cater to novices too much. At
> least SFA has a learning curve, short as it is. Skilled SFA players don't
> have to worry about any newbie choosing a cheesy character and winning
> without displaying any hint of skill.
Yes, SFA is better than a lot of other things. But it is worse than
SSF2T. Why are these two claims incompatible?
> However, with SSF2T, any non-SF2 player who wants to get into this game will
> have to spend lots time and money getting used to the game. There's no
> incentive to do just that, since to them, SSF2T represents nothing new or
> novel.
Fine. Again, no one is confused about the economic factors influencing
Capcoms decisions. But they are making weak games. That is what I am talking
about.
>Now that SFA2 are in the final stages of tweaking before its release, most of
>the messages on this newsgroup seem to be saying, "Get rid of air blocking!
>Get rid of chain combos! Get rid of Alpha Counters!" Gee, what do you want,
>another SSF2T? That's it, just more of the same.
I'm personally not saying get rid of anything. The problem as I see
it is that the SF2 engine does not (gameplay-wise) demand any of the new
SFA additions. They are put in to attract new players as newfangled
"features". In theory, I have no problem with that. In practice, it happens
to suck. If it can be fixed, that is great, and I'm eager to play.
>I for one appreciated the freedom of chain combos in SFA. I liked airblocking;
>less boring ground games where each player tries to poke the other. And
>there's little that's more satisfying than interrupting an opponent's rhythm
>by smacking them with an Alpha Counter.
>Of course, there are flaws in these new features, but why kill them when you
>can just fix them? I for one am hoping that SFA2 will not turn into yet
>another SSF2T (even though chains have already been axed).
Well, I am not foolish enough to hope for SSF2T. No one is. All I
want is a game on SSF2T's level of depth, which SFA just is not. If the
problems of SFA can be fixed, great. I do look forward to SFA2, but SFA
is junk, relative to the rest of the SF2 series. I put it ahead only
of SF1 and SF2 Classic. Seriously.
Seth Killian
Kuroyume
: Excerpts from netnews.alt.games.sf2: 19-Feb-96 In defense of SFA by
: Allen K...@cornell.edu
: > That's one reason why SFA has airblocking, so that players don't have to
: > take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
: > projectile.
: Good analogy. It's a hard position to defend, though, because Mr.
: Painter will say "What? Jumping over varying speed fireballs with Honda
: is easy... I was doing it since the game came out. Honda has always
: perfected Ryu because jumping over those fireballs is a lot easier to do
: than sitting across the screen throwing them. In fact, to better
What? Jumping over varying speed fireballs with Honda is easy... I was doing
it since the game came out. :) Okay, seriously... while I don't mind having
non-airblockable FBs, there are many people on this group who love it. That's
fine. Airblocking FBs have grown on me, but airblocking air-to-air attacks
have never. This is my main complaint with airblocking.
[deleted]
: Ok, but don't you think it's possible to put new stuff into a game which
: doesn't simultaneously destroy the learning curve?
: There have been a couple of posts chastising folks on this group for
: "wishing that SFA2 were another SSF2T" and I sort of agree with that
: thinking, but I don't see how -NEW STUFF- and -GOOD LEARNING CURVE- have
: to be mutually exclusive. (wait, did I use that expression correctly?)
Nicely put. Wait a minute, we're agreeing here... is there a full moon out
or something? :)
SSF2T is history. Future SF games will not be like SSF2T. But who's to say
that Capcom cannot make another SF engine different from SSF2T, and by all
means SFA, and have it be an excellent one? It's certainly possible.
Although, IMO, there will never be another game that could be mentioned in
the same breath as SSF2T, I don't rule it an impossiblilty. And I really
don't want SFA2 to be SSF2T. Yes, it'd be nice, but there are changes
needed to keep the game fresh, just as long as those changes/additions will
not ruin the game as I felt chain-combos and to a certain extent AC/airblocking
did. However, I never want to see another SFA-quality game from Capcom again.
SFA stunk. Period. As for SFA2, I like most of what I hear of it, despite
the complaints about the CCs [which I'm sure will be modified, right?],
because it sounds like the current CCs can ruin the game on it's own.
WIll SFA2 be as good as SSF2T? No. No way. Despite not having played the
game yet, I can already tell you this. If SFA2 has noticable improvements
in it, I think it will be a fine game. As good as SSF2T? No, but that's
some pretty high standards to live up to.
: jk
: --
: 0UY0T allen jamie klein S1HT0D yow! 3MT3LU0Y yan...@cmu.edu 0DYHW
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Painter | "I believed, if time passes, everything turns into
pai...@rohan.sdsu.edu | beauty. If the rains stop, tears clean the scars
pai...@mail.sdsu.edu | of memory away. Everything starts wearing fresh
| colors. Every song begins playing a heartfelt
| melody. Jealousy embelishes a page of the epic.
| Desire is embraced in a dream. But my mind is
| still in chaos, and..."
| - X JAPAN - "Say Anything"
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kuroyume
: It seems like there are a handful of people on this newsgroup who are
: out by the sheer volume of posts by this "elite."
: Now don't think of this as flamebait, but I've decided to say why I think SFA
: is better than SSF2T, and defend some of the aspects of SFA that people want
: taken out in SFA2:
: - Let's face it: SSF2T may be the best of the original SF2 series, but by the
: time of its release, the SF2 series already lost all but the most hardcore
: of players. Yes, there were crowds around the SSF2T machines when it first
: came out, but these crowds died out very quickly when they realized that
: there was nothing really novel in the game, except for Akuma. Super moves
: were hardly used, since the meter charged up too slowly, and when it does,
: the opponent merely becomes more defensive.
Super meters may have charged up a tad too slow, but c'mon now... in SFA we
have supers flying across the screen every 5-10 seconds.
Super moves should not play that large of a role whatsoever.
: - SFA was a welcome change to the old SF2 series. Even though the graphics
: took a step backwards, it still grew on you (to take the words of Tom Cannon
: straight from his posts back then).
Welcome change? To who, scrubs? The graphics along with the gamplay took
several LARGE steps backwards.
: - While SSF2T only had one new character, Akuma, SFA introduced Adon, Guy,
: Sodom, Rose, Bird-pooh, and even Dan. New styles of playing, and new
: tactics to defend against.
Wait. Ryu, Ken, Chun Li, Bison, Charile/Guile, Sagat, Akuma... where have
I seen these guys before? Only five new characters I can see... [I don't
count Dan, as he is just meant as a joke]. And of those new characters,
most of them had rediculously stupid simple little strategies you can perform
Guy's chain redizzy, Rose [slide, slide, slide, um.. did I mention slide?],
Sodom [that infamous RH].
SSF2 already had 16 characters and SSF2T was the final tune up to an excellent
series. SFA was meant to be different from SF but didn't manage to do that
very well in the character department.
[airblocking discussion deleted]
: - Chain combos open up a new door to combos and tactics. Yeah, I know, there
: are videos that show difficult but killer combos available in the SF2 series
: but these combos only belonged to the priveleged few characters lucky enough
: to exploit them, like Guile. What does that say in terms of character
: balance in SSF2T?
Chain combos are plain stupid. [See Seth's reply for a good explaination for
this]
There were 17 [or 33 if you count the SSF2 characters] in SSF2T and I thought
they did a pretty good job in balancing the characters. Obviously, the more
characters you have in a game, the more difficult it will be to make it
balanced for each character vs each character. SFA only has 13 [counting Dan]
characters and I think the character balance in that game is pretty awful.
Did someone say Street Fighter Ken?
[deleted]
: - Alpha Counters are also an excellent way for a player to reverse the tide of
: a match. Yeah, I know, this does encourage turtling, but that's only a flaw
: in its implementation in SFA, not a fundamental flaw with AC's. All you
: have to do is make AC's more difficult to time, or make them take up all of
: you meter, or anything else that discourage AC-fests.
With all of the acceptable solutions to fixing ACs out there now, this
paragraph, I will ignore.
: - SFA does have a lower learning curve, so that Capcom can try to pull in new
: players. Of course, this angers the "elite" who spent most of their money
: on the SF2 series practicing until they become the best in their area, only
: to feel threatened with a game that even novices can learn and become good
: at without spending too much money.
I see nothing wrong with wanting to get more new players, but don't lower the
learning curve SO low so that people trip over it.
: To those guys, I'd like to say, "Hello?!?" Why do you think the MK series
: is so popular, like MK3? Because after MK3 lures all of the youngsters with
: the eye candy, it presents such a no-brainer game engine that these newbies
: won't become easily discouraged by a difficult engine.
MK3 was popular?
: Now SFA is nowhere near MK3 in terms of simplicity, but the diehards are
: still complaining that Capcom is trying to cater to novices too much. At
: least SFA has a learning curve, short as it is. Skilled SFA players don't
: have to worry about any newbie choosing a cheesy character and winning
: without displaying any hint of skill.
SFA was simple enough. SSF2T players win at SFA not because they have
developed SFA skills although they can exploit flaws in the gameplay. Rather
SSF2T players win at SFA because by now, we know how to play SF and win.
: However, with SSF2T, any non-SF2 player who wants to get into this game will
: have to spend lots time and money getting used to the game. There's no
: incentive to do just that, since to them, SSF2T represents nothing new or
: novel.
Right. But this is not justification for making an awful game.
[deleted]
: I for one appreciated the freedom of chain combos in SFA. I liked airblocking
: less boring ground games where each player tries to poke the other. And
: there's little that's more satisfying than interrupting an opponent's rhythm
: by smacking them with an Alpha Counter.
Airblocking simplified SFA. People find it useless to do air-to-air attacks
now, leading to one-dimensional gameplay, which is exactly what you said...
boring.
: Of course, there are flaws in these new features, but why kill them when you
: can just fix them? I for one am hoping that SFA2 will not turn into yet
: another SSF2T (even though chains have already been axed).
And that was a first step in the right direction. AC/airblocking do not need
to be eliminated however, simply modified.
Allen Kim
>
>ak...@cornell.edu (Allen Kim) writes:
>
>>It seems like there are a handful of people on this newsgroup who are
>>dominating the opinions posted. Opinions to the contrary seem to be drowned
>>out by the sheer volume of posts by this "elite."
>
> I agree. There's nothing worse than hearing someone who knows what
>they're talking about speak.
Sounds a little "elistist" to me already, no offense.
>>Now don't think of this as flamebait, but I've decided to say why I think
>>SFA is better than SSF2T, and defend some of the aspects of SFA that people
>>want taken out in SFA2:
>
> I don't regard it as flamebait, but rather a good instantiation of
>your general wrongness.
Wrongness. Since when are preferences wrong? Oh, wait, you mean my
arguments, right? OK ...
>>- SFA was a welcome change to the old SF2 series. Even though the graphics
>> took a step backwards, it still grew on you (to take the words of Tom
>> Cannon straight from his posts back then).
>
> "A welcome change". Purely subjective. To some, like yourself,
>obviously true. To others, not true. As for being a step backwards, both
>graphically and otherwise, I agree. Perhaps it grew on you. So will mold,
>if you hang around it long enough.
I was certainly happy that the SF series finally underwent a change. Then
again, I'm also a fan of X-Men:CotA and MSH, so that may be the reason why I
enjoyed SFA more than most of the people on this newsgroup. (By the way, I
consider myself a player of reasonable skill, i.e. I'm not a spazzy
Wolverine.)
As for the graphics, yes, I too thought, "That's SFA? Doesn't look like much
to me." Then I started playing it and got hooked. That's how I got used to
the graphics. If you're still complaining, just remember that in SSF2T, there
were already some signs that Capcom was switching to the cartoonier style of
graphics.
>>- While SSF2T only had one new character, Akuma, SFA introduced Adon, Guy,
>> Sodom, Rose, Bird-pooh, and even Dan. New styles of playing, and new
>> tactics to defend against.
>
> Technically, SSF2T could be claimed to have 33 characters, if you
>include the Super versions. Although that would be a bit of a stretch, I
>don't need it to show that you're completely wrong here.
I guess SS3 has 24 characters, right?
>Although SFA
>introduced several "new" characters, it is also obviously guilty of the
>removal of many more. Even among the choices about what characters were
>removed, you can still criticize it. They left clearly disproportionate
>numbers of the hated FB/UC characters and took out their more novel designs
>(like Dhalsim, or Honda). Also, the "newness" of the new characters wore
>off pretty quickly, especially in cases like Sodom, who was just a terribly
>implemented design. Others like Rose, who while more interesting in herself,
>were reduced to childishly dumb tactics because of their disgusting
>effectiveness. SFA clearly loses in whatever value you assign character
>depth/variety/number/etc...
These sound just as ignorant as if I said "Zangief is nothing but a ticker,"
or "Guile is the mother of all turtles." By the way, I wonder why you say
that Sodom (my favorite SFA character, despite the name and despite the
Standing Roundhouse) is a terribly implemented design. He was my first choice
for taking on FB/DP old-schoolers.
>> That's one reason why SFA has airblocking, so that players don't have to
>> take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
>> projectile.
>
> Nice image, but unfortunately it does not apply. Try some examples
>of the insurmountable FB.
Corner traps.
Oh, here comes one fireball as I get up. Might as well block it. Oh, here
comes another. I'll just jump straight up, since if I jump towards him, I'll
eat a DP. Oh, whoops, silly me, he threw a slow fireball, and I didn't have
to clairvoyance to see it. Man, I must really stink.
>> In SFA, chain combos can level the playing field, plus they allow for more
>> variety in playing styles of characters. For example, Guy is the king of
>> chains, while Birdie and M.Bison don't need them. (For those of you lucky
>> enough to have a SFA2 beta machine near you, how good is Guy, now that
>> chain combos are gone?)
>
> This combo talk is just totally confused. Guy as king of chains?
>Sure, but that had very little to do with why he was such a strong character.
Actually, it had a lot to do with his strength as a fighter. Overhead,
followed by a chain, or sweeps? Dropping elbow, then a chain. Throw two
sweeps, and if they aren't blocked, follow through with a Forward Bushin Run.
You can easily control the match with Guy's chains. But, oh yeah, I forgot,
chains are for scrub players.
>Chain combos did not level the playing field, they just simplified it.
Perhaps, but they do put more variety in the game. I know there are a lot of
exceptions, but most of the combos in the SF2 series consisted of air attack,
ground attack, interrupt a special move in.
>Further,
>you assume that the SSF2T lovers would be "angry" because they lose at SFA.
>I think this is almost across the board 100% wrong. The SSF2T elite
>generally kick ass at SFA, but they don't like it. They win for stupid and
>banal reasons, and thoughtful tactics take a back-seat to elementary combos
>and guessing games in terms of effectiveness.
And you think that the SF series should mainly be a game of complex strategy?
Maybe not, but you're portraying SFA as nothing more than another KI. "They
win for stupid and banal reasons." It's that bias against SFA that really
confuses me, considering how much genuine trash is out there in the arcades
these days.
> So what? What does this have to do with game quality? I can see
>*why* Capcom did a lot of what they did with SFA: it attracts more players
>(more scrubs). That much is obvious and uncontested. I just *also* think
>they made a crappy game. Defend SFA on its own terms, not in economic
>ones, which no game-*player* (not producer/developer) is interested in.
On it's own terms? SFA does have airblocking, Alpha Counters, chains, and
these are the very things that people complain about. However, I don't see
these new features as mistakes; I see them as an opportunity to get used to a
different game engine. I see nothing cheap or novice about any of these
features, since for every "dumb" tactic that you can site in SFA, I can think
of a few ways to counter it.
There's nothing really wrong with SSF2T in itself, but in the context of the
whole picture, it really has become the best of a very old game engine.
That's why I prefer SFA over SSF2T.
> Yes, SFA is better than a lot of other things. But it is worse than
>SSF2T. Why are these two claims incompatible?
Because the way people on this newsgroup malign SFA, they make it seem like
SFA is the worst game of all time. Yeah, I realize they meant to say that SFA
is the worst _SF_ game of all time, but even so, that's a pretty unfair knock
at the game. Why? Capcom tweaked the SF2 engine many times, and the final
tweak that is SSF2T worked. By then, many of the more elaborate SF2 tactics
have been discovered and fine-tuned over the years. Then comes along SFA with
its different game engine, and the SSF2T elite, after months of playing it,
dismiss it, saying that it will never be a SSF2T. Well, of course not,
because not even a year has passed since its introduction. I'm willing to bet
that more elaborate techniques would have been developed for SFA if people
kept playing it for years and years.
> Well, I am not foolish enough to hope for SSF2T. No one is. All I
>want is a game on SSF2T's level of depth, which SFA just is not. If the
>problems of SFA can be fixed, great. I do look forward to SFA2, but SFA
>is junk, relative to the rest of the SF2 series. I put it ahead only
>of SF1 and SF2 Classic. Seriously.
Well, after all is said and done, I share your hopes for SFA2.
Wow, did I really type this much already?
Allen Kim
>
>Allen Kim (ak...@cornell.edu) wrote:
>: - While SSF2T only had one new character, Akuma, SFA introduced Adon, Guy,
>: Sodom, Rose, Bird-pooh, and even Dan. New styles of playing, and new
>: tactics to defend against.
>
>Wait. Ryu, Ken, Chun Li, Bison, Charile/Guile, Sagat, Akuma... where have
>I seen these guys before? Only five new characters I can see... [I don't
>count Dan, as he is just meant as a joke]. And of those new characters,
>most of them had rediculously stupid simple little strategies you can perform
>Guy's chain redizzy, Rose [slide, slide, slide, um.. did I mention slide?],
>Sodom [that infamous RH].
Like I said in a previous post, SFA has tons more strategies than your
simplifications. Check out my version of the SFA FAQ if you want a few.
>Chain combos are plain stupid. [See Seth's reply for a good explaination for
>this]
>
>There were 17 [or 33 if you count the SSF2 characters] in SSF2T and I thought
>they did a pretty good job in balancing the characters. Obviously, the more
>characters you have in a game, the more difficult it will be to make it
>balanced for each character vs each character. SFA only has 13 [counting Dan]
>characters and I think the character balance in that game is pretty awful.
>Did someone say Street Fighter Ken?
I guess you could also call it Street Fighter Rose, right? I personally never
saw Ken as a threat; I was too busy eating up every Ken that I met with my
Sodom, and even without his infamous Roundhouse.
>: To those guys, I'd like to say, "Hello?!?" Why do you think the MK series
>: is so popular, like MK3? Because after MK3 lures all of the youngsters
>: with the eye candy, it presents such a no-brainer game engine that these
>: newbies won't become easily discouraged by a difficult engine.
>
>MK3 was popular?
Sad, isn't it? But true.
>: I for one appreciated the freedom of chain combos in SFA. I liked
>: airblocking less boring ground games where each player tries to poke the
>: other. And there's little that's more satisfying than interrupting an
>: opponent's rhythm by smacking them with an Alpha Counter.
>
>Airblocking simplified SFA. People find it useless to do air-to-air attacks
>now, leading to one-dimensional gameplay, which is exactly what you said...
>boring.
Yeah, I forgot, air-to-air attacks are the SOLE reason why SSF2T is not
one-dimensional ...
Sorry for the sarcasm. If air-to-air attacks like hop kicks are missed, why
not just throw a ground-based punch? It's not like there's full airblocking as
in X-Men and MSH.
>: Of course, there are flaws in these new features, but why kill them when you
>: can just fix them? I for one am hoping that SFA2 will not turn into yet
>: another SSF2T (even though chains have already been axed).
>
>And that was a first step in the right direction. AC/airblocking do not need
>to be eliminated however, simply modified.
Step in the right direction? Why not just increased the difficulty of timing
chains, like in Darkstalkers? The "scrub" factor will be eliminated, and
chains will still add the variety that's needed.
Allen J Klein
Allen K...@cornell.edu
> >include the Super versions. Although that would be a bit of a stretch, I
> >don't need it to show that you're completely wrong here.
>
Nah, they uppped the character count a bit from SS2's one (2 if
ChamCham sneaks in there) to maybe four (nako, haoh, genju, and perhaps
galford)
> >> That's one reason why SFA has airblocking, so that players don't have to
> >> take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
> >> projectile.
> >
> > Nice image, but unfortunately it does not apply. Try some examples
> >of the insurmountable FB.
>
> Corner traps.
>
> Oh, here comes one fireball as I get up. Might as well block it. Oh, here
> comes another. I'll just jump straight up, since if I jump towards
him, I'll
> eat a DP. Oh, whoops, silly me, he threw a slow fireball, and I didn't have
> to clairvoyance to see it. Man, I must really stink.
Don't get carried away. In SF2, it was *incredibly* easy to hop any
speed fireball with characters like Honda and Blanka. In fact, since
that hopping was so easy, neither of them could ever lose to a ken or
ryu player. Heck, if you were so fucking stupid as to land on a
fireball when using E.Honda, you better tell folks that you're joystick
was broken, or else they're going to think you're on drugs 'cause
jumping those FBs with honda is so goddamn easy, ya know?
Hehe, ok, I'll calm down now...
> Perhaps, but they do put more variety in the game. I know there are a
lot of
> exceptions, but most of the combos in the SF2 series consisted of air
attack,
> ground attack, interrupt a special move in.
Two words: Vampire Hunter.
> There's nothing really wrong with SSF2T in itself, but in the context of the
> whole picture, it really has become the best of a very old game engine.
> That's why I prefer SFA over SSF2T.
One a related note, I'd like to mention that, unlike X-men wolverine
players, I've never seen people win in SFA who didn't deserve it. That
is, I'm quite confident that my win % against the top Alpha folks here
at CMU would be similar on an SSF2T machine. Isn't that all that really
matters?
> Because the way people on this newsgroup malign SFA, they make it seem like
> SFA is the worst game of all time.
But it IS the worst game of all time. Christ, Time Killers is better.
(sorry, I know, I said I'd calm down ^_^)
Seth James Killian
>Sounds a little "elistist" to me already, no offense.
None taken. But would you seriously rather listen to an unabashed
scrub? I never have a problem listening to someone who I can learn from.
>I was certainly happy that the SF series finally underwent a change. Then
>again, I'm also a fan of X-Men:CotA and MSH, so that may be the reason why I
>enjoyed SFA more than most of the people on this newsgroup. (By the way, I
>consider myself a player of reasonable skill, i.e. I'm not a spazzy
>Wolverine.)
Again, note the lack of any argument whatsoever. You were glad SF2
underwent a change. Good for you. Others were not glad it underwent the
change that it did. And I don't think it has much to do with being a fan
of X-Men or MSH, as I played/play both avidly (although I did play Wolverine
and Sentinel... it was just too funny watching people who thought that Omega
Red, with enough skill, stood a chance :).
>As for the graphics, yes, I too thought, "That's SFA? Doesn't look like much
>to me." Then I started playing it and got hooked. That's how I got used to
>the graphics. If you're still complaining, just remember that in SSF2T, there
>were already some signs that Capcom was switching to the cartoonier style of
>graphics.
To be honest, graphics would be basically last on any list of
complaints about SFA. I don't think they are that great, but I would be
happy (okay, not happy) with Stickfighter 2 if it had *gameplay* superiorr
to SSF2T.
>> Technically, SSF2T could be claimed to have 33 characters, if you
>>include the Super versions. Although that would be a bit of a stretch, I
>>don't need it to show that you're completely wrong here.
>I guess SS3 has 24 characters, right?
Uh, whatever. Is this supposed to detract from the main point that
SSF2T has more characters with more moves and a larger diversity in style
than does SFA? No? Then please stay on track.
>These sound just as ignorant as if I said "Zangief is nothing but a ticker,"
>or "Guile is the mother of all turtles." By the way, I wonder why you say
>that Sodom (my favorite SFA character, despite the name and despite the
>Standing Roundhouse) is a terribly implemented design. He was my first choice
>for taking on FB/DP old-schoolers.
First I'd like to compliment you on dodging my central point about
SFA retaining the somewhat less interesting SF2 character designs. Never
pick a fight you know you can't win. But as for calling my characterizations
of the SFA fighting styles "ignorant"... Perhaps I should clarify. If you
want to *win*, then you play them with repetitive boring and simple tactics.
If you are just fooling around constantly, then feel free to use a couple of
other moves. And incidentally, Zangief *is* nothing but a ticker. It's
just that he is typically forced to use his entire arsenal of moves and
a lot of head games to bring out his strengths. Don't try and talk to me
about variety in playing styles. Your comments about Sodom alone betray
you. This is where I play the "elitist" card you seem to have given me,
and just move on.
Why is Sodom a terrible character? I don't say terrible in the
sense that he can't or doesn't win. He is decent overall, and in scrub-level
competition, he wins a lot. But he is a crap design. Uh, let's give him
a stupid slide you can't retaliate against and that goes under FBs perfectly.
How about a no-brainer cr. fierce air defense? Blah blah blah. Sodom is
completely flat, and the essence of thoughtless character design. Yeah,
he wins, but for extremely stupid reasons, which require no real strategy
or forethought whatsoever.
>> Nice image, but unfortunately it does not apply. Try some examples
>>of the insurmountable FB.
>Corner traps.
>Oh, here comes one fireball as I get up. Might as well block it. Oh, here
>comes another. I'll just jump straight up, since if I jump towards him, I'll
>eat a DP. Oh, whoops, silly me, he threw a slow fireball, and I didn't have
>to clairvoyance to see it. Man, I must really stink.
God, you really are a scrub. I know, not a happy argumentative move,
but after this, I really can't not say it. You imply that corner traps are
somehow "unfair", and that this justifies air-blocking? Geez. Overlooking
the fact that you (again) have failed to mention a significant number of
characters that are FB corner-trappable, this is still a garbage complaint.
Where do you start off in SSF2T? In the middle of the board. Why are you
now in the corner? Because 1) you are foolish, and have put yourself here
of your own free will (ironically, this can actually be a good move in SFA
at times) 2) you have been *pushed* into the corner by the controlling play
of your opponent. Being able to control the opponents motion is a signal
of SKILL. The corner trap embodies the *essence* of the positional play,
and why it is so important and often subtle.
So, after being bullied through the superior skill of your opponent
into the corner, you now have to play a *gasp* guessing game, where you
could theoretically be forced to land on a FB! Heavens to betsy! Quick,
change the game engine to account for this horrible imbalance! Further, in
almost any corner trap situation, if the trapper becomes predictable, he
will pay. It's just that the guessing game is in his favor, which he has
earned by forcing you into a disadvantageous position.
>> This combo talk is just totally confused. Guy as king of chains?
>>Sure, but that had very little to do with why he was such a strong character.
>Actually, it had a lot to do with his strength as a fighter. Overhead,
>followed by a chain, or sweeps? Dropping elbow, then a chain. Throw two
>sweeps, and if they aren't blocked, follow through with a Forward Bushin Run.
>You can easily control the match with Guy's chains. But, oh yeah, I forgot,
>chains are for scrub players.
This is actually funny. Do any of these tactics start with chains?
No. The effective part is some other trickiness, usually with the over-
powered elbow drop (which is most of why he is strong). The chain is only
"filler". If chains were absent, he'd presumably have some other normal
move which he could still combo into something else to do damage. Chains
don't create anything new at all here. They just substitute.
>>Chain combos did not level the playing field, they just simplified it.
>Perhaps, but they do put more variety in the game. I know there are a lot of
>exceptions, but most of the combos in the SF2 series consisted of air attack,
>ground attack, interrupt a special move in.
More variety? With chains? Dud. Everyone has a best chain for
the situation. You always use the best chain, unless you are dumb. These
chains consist of idiotically just tapping out a series of buttons. Sure,
now Ryu/Ken can do all sorts of "different" combos with standing shorts or
forwards or whatever, but there is still a best thing to do, and everything
else is just a mistake on your part. It's like KI in that sense: Yeah,
there are a ton of combos, but you only really need to know 2 or 3 max.
to have the top ability.
>And you think that the SF series should mainly be a game of complex strategy?
Yes.
>Maybe not, but you're portraying SFA as nothing more than another KI. "They
>win for stupid and banal reasons." It's that bias against SFA that really
>confuses me, considering how much genuine trash is out there in the arcades
>these days.
SFA is better than a lot of other games. But this is a.g.SF2, so
I figured I wouldn't need to compare it to the other 8billion fighters
out there. Especially since it is obviously inferior to another game
within the obvious domain of discussion, SSF2T. And incidentally, while
SFA is better than the entire MK series, and KI, and some others, it is
vastly worse than VF2, or PR, and possibly even things like MSH.
>On it's own terms? SFA does have airblocking, Alpha Counters, chains, and
>these are the very things that people complain about. However, I don't see
>these new features as mistakes; I see them as an opportunity to get used to a
>different game engine.
Fine. I didn't call them mistakes in and of themselves, but their
implementation is a step backwards for gameplay, which I call a mistake. When
the problems are fixed, then defend it. You can't expect to defend some
idealized version of SFA which does not exist.
>I see nothing cheap or novice about any of these
>features, since for every "dumb" tactic that you can site in SFA, I can think
>of a few ways to counter it.
Okay, how about Ken's roll trap, just for starters? It's not
uncounterable, and to pretend that's what I'm saying is foolish. All
tactics have counters, but the counters are disproportionately difficult
relative to the difficulty of the attack. It is very easy to just keep
sliding with Rose, but you have to work way too hard to prevent this in
general. But I too can think of a way to counter most everything in SFA:
AC. This of course is also a problem, because the counters are too generic
and simple. But that's SFA.
>There's nothing really wrong with SSF2T in itself, but in the context of the
>whole picture, it really has become the best of a very old game engine.
>That's why I prefer SFA over SSF2T.
Um, the second sentence does not follow from the first, unless you
make the embarrassing implication that newness equates with being grounds
for preference. Do you constantly go out and try new foods, or do you find
yourself eating some of your favorites most of the time? Is chess a worse
game than some newer game on the grounds that it is extremely old? A good
game is a good game, no matter how old. A bad game is bad, no matter how
new. SSF2T is good. SFA is bad. That's about as simple as I can make it.
>> Yes, SFA is better than a lot of other things. But it is worse than
>>SSF2T. Why are these two claims incompatible?
>Because the way people on this newsgroup malign SFA, they make it seem like
>SFA is the worst game of all time. Yeah, I realize they meant to say that SFA
>is the worst _SF_ game of all time, but even so, that's a pretty unfair knock
>at the game. Why? Capcom tweaked the SF2 engine many times, and the final
>tweak that is SSF2T worked. By then, many of the more elaborate SF2 tactics
>have been discovered and fine-tuned over the years. Then comes along SFA with
>its different game engine, and the SSF2T elite, after months of playing it,
>dismiss it, saying that it will never be a SSF2T. Well, of course not,
>because not even a year has passed since its introduction. I'm willing to bet
>that more elaborate techniques would have been developed for SFA if people
>kept playing it for years and years.
That is a very weak position to take. I say all crows are black.
You say, "no, that's not true. Given enough time, we will find a non-black
crow." Of course, I cannot disprove you out of hand, but as many people
who dislike SFA have been playing SF for MANY years, they are thusly
qualified to judge the relative merits of each succession. SFA is no babe
in the woods, and these supposes fabulous strategies are not as yet
forthcoming. Why don't you go develop a few, then post them....
>> Well, I am not foolish enough to hope for SSF2T. No one is. All I
>>want is a game on SSF2T's level of depth, which SFA just is not. If the
>>problems of SFA can be fixed, great. I do look forward to SFA2, but SFA
>>is junk, relative to the rest of the SF2 series. I put it ahead only
>>of SF1 and SF2 Classic. Seriously.
Seth Killian
Chris Finnie
>
>Excerpts from netnews.alt.games.sf2: 19-Feb-96 In defense of SFA by
>Allen K...@cornell.edu
>> take full damage just because they can't play Donkey Kong with a slow
>> projectile.
>
>Painter will say "What? Jumping over varying speed fireballs with Honda
>is easy... I was doing it since the game came out. Honda has always
This whole air-blocking issue has been quite amusing. Likening hopping
FB's to playing Donkey Kong, etc... Well a friend of mine came up with
a solution to the scrub's gripes of hopping FB's, where they will
be given an easier time, yet airblocking can be removed and satisfy
the purists/hardcores/myself/whatevers...:
Make all jab strength fireballs RED.
Make all strong fireballs GREEN.
Make all fierce FB's BLUE.
This won't affect the gameplan of any serious player, and it'll help
those who have a habit of sitting on those 'damn fireballs'...
Unless you're colorblind, where you'd be out of luck I guess...
Capcom?
chris f
Allen J Klein
Chris Finnie@intergate.b
> a solution to the scrub's gripes of hopping FB's, where they will
> be given an easier time, yet airblocking can be removed and satisfy
> the purists/hardcores/myself/whatevers...:
>
> Make all jab strength fireballs RED.
>
> Make all strong fireballs GREEN.
>
> Make all fierce FB's BLUE.
Cool!
Hmm... in SNES Classic SF2, Ryu made a different pitch sound for the
different speeds, didn't play it enough to notice whether it had a
similar effect.
Allen J Klein
> sense that he can't or doesn't win. He is decent overall, and in scrub-level
> competition, he wins a lot. But he is a crap design. Uh, let's give him
> a stupid slide you can't retaliate against and that goes under FBs perfectly.
Supposedly the slide has been weakened in SFA2. This as well as no
chains for Guy and Rose are REALLY going to make things interesting (at
least in the first few days... Guy and Sodom will still be losers, IMO)
> So, after being bullied through the superior skill of your opponent
> into the corner, you now have to play a *gasp* guessing game, where you
> could theoretically be forced to land on a FB! Heavens to betsy! Quick,
> change the game engine to account for this horrible imbalance! Further, in
> almost any corner trap situation, if the trapper becomes predictable, he
> will pay. It's just that the guessing game is in his favor, which he has
> earned by forcing you into a disadvantageous position.
Especially, if you are Ryu, it is a MISTAKE to corner trap E.Honda
because he'll easily hop over all of your fireballs and nail you with
that huge jump roundhouse. The trick to fighting Honda with Ryu is to
avoid ever throwing a fireball and go for some ticks! (esp. in SSF2T!)
> And incidentally, while
> SFA is better than the entire MK series, and KI, and some others, it is
> vastly worse than VF2, or PR, and possibly even things like MSH.
Um, MSH is a piece of crap. The only reason you didn't like X-men was
because of bad character balance? If wolverine and sentinel were taken
out of the game I'd still hate it.
> All
> tactics have counters, but the counters are disproportionately difficult
> relative to the difficulty of the attack. It is very easy to just keep
> sliding with Rose, but you have to work way too hard to prevent this in
> general. But I too can think of a way to counter most everything in SFA:
> AC. This of course is also a problem, because the counters are too generic
> and simple. But that's SFA.
BWAH HAH HAH! Sliding with Rose is very similar to jumping fireballs
with Honda. It's so easy to do and so hard to prevent! Everywhere you
go in the world, you see Rose players doing lots of slide kicks... well,
during SSF2T days, Honda had the same thing, he'd just jump fireballs
all day and perfect all Ryu and Ken players with ease.
(shit, you know, if I wasn't such a wise-ass, I might have put together
a strong serious point in that last line)
Kuroyume
: In article <4gd707$3...@gondor.sdsu.edu>, pai...@rohan.sdsu.edu says...
: >
: >Allen Kim (ak...@cornell.edu) wrote:
: >: - While SSF2T only had one new character, Akuma, SFA introduced Adon, Guy,
: >: Sodom, Rose, Bird-pooh, and even Dan. New styles of playing, and new
: >: tactics to defend against.
: >
: >Wait. Ryu, Ken, Chun Li, Bison, Charile/Guile, Sagat, Akuma... where have
: >I seen these guys before? Only five new characters I can see... [I don't
: >count Dan, as he is just meant as a joke]. And of those new characters,
: >most of them had rediculously stupid simple little strategies you can perform
: >Guy's chain redizzy, Rose [slide, slide, slide, um.. did I mention slide?],
: >Sodom [that infamous RH].
: Like I said in a previous post, SFA has tons more strategies than your
: simplifications. Check out my version of the SFA FAQ if you want a few.
SFA may have more strategy involved than I have given it credit for, but the
truth of the matter is, it is not needed to win at SFA. Simple strategies
are efficient enough to win.
: >Chain combos are plain stupid. [See Seth's reply for a good explaination for
: >this]
: >
: >There were 17 [or 33 if you count the SSF2 characters] in SSF2T and I thought
: >they did a pretty good job in balancing the characters. Obviously, the more
: >characters you have in a game, the more difficult it will be to make it
: >balanced for each character vs each character. SFA only has 13 [counting
Dan]
: >characters and I think the character balance in that game is pretty awful.
: >Did someone say Street Fighter Ken?
: I guess you could also call it Street Fighter Rose, right? I personally never
: saw Ken as a threat; I was too busy eating up every Ken that I met with my
: Sodom, and even without his infamous Roundhouse.
I call it Street Fighter Ken because Ken is just too powerful. His roll,
whether used in traps or otherwise gives Ken too many options for his opponent
to think about. Rose can give Ken a tough time, but I still think Ken barely
edges out Rose and just about everyone else easily.
:>: To those guys, I'd like to say, "Hello?!?" Why do you think the MK series
:>: is so popular, like MK3? Because after MK3 lures all of the youngsters
:>: with the eye candy, it presents such a no-brainer game engine that these
:>: newbies won't become easily discouraged by a difficult engine.
:>
: >MK3 was popular?
: Sad, isn't it? But true.
That is SAD!
: >: I for one appreciated the freedom of chain combos in SFA. I liked
: >: airblocking less boring ground games where each player tries to poke the
: >: other. And there's little that's more satisfying than interrupting an
: >: opponent's rhythm by smacking them with an Alpha Counter.
: >
: >Airblocking simplified SFA. People find it useless to do air-to-air attacks
: >now, leading to one-dimensional gameplay, which is exactly what you said...
: >boring.
: Yeah, I forgot, air-to-air attacks are the SOLE reason why SSF2T is not
: one-dimensional ...
: Sorry for the sarcasm. If air-to-air attacks like hop kicks are missed, why
: not just throw a ground-based punch? It's not like there's full airblocking
as
: in X-Men and MSH.
Huh? How can you miss an air-to-air attack? I don't understand your statement
here. Please clarify.
And I should have stated that my statement mainly refers to SFA turtles.
ACs/airblocking/decreased throw ranges/rolling/chain combos all reward
turtles quite well on SFA in comparison to other SFs. Maybe you just haven't
seen any really BAD turtles...but believe me, when you do, you will see that
turtling is probably the best tactic on SFA. Go and try it youself the next
time you are at a SFA machine. Turtles can be beat, but with all of these
new "editions" to SFA, they usually make you work for the win. Turtling is
actually quite simple. [ever notice that turtles don't jump at you?] They
just play a boring ground game throughout the entire game. [Hey, there's that
word again...boring]
Again, yes, you can turtle in any SF game but the rewards for it are much
greater in SFA because of those I've listed above and IMO, a good amount of
the blame is placed on airblocking and ACs.
t
BTW, in Southern California, there are quite a few more turtles on SFA than
on previous SFs.
:>:Of course, there are flaws in these new features, but why kill them when you
: >: can just fix them? I for one am hoping that SFA2 will not turn into yet
: >: another SSF2T (even though chains have already been axed).
: >
: >And that was a first step in the right direction. AC/airblocking do not need
: >to be eliminated however, simply modified.
: Step in the right direction? Why not just increased the difficulty of timing
: chains, like in Darkstalkers? The "scrub" factor will be eliminated, and
: chains will still add the variety that's needed.
No. Chain combos should have NEVER entered any SF game. They make AC look
wonderful. If scrubs want chain combos so bad, they can go play MSH, X-Men,
or KI2. SF is among the most popular games in video game history and should
not have it's great name tainted with such mindless garbage such as chain
combos.
Allen Kim
>
>ak...@cornell.edu (Allen Kim) writes:
>
>>I guess SS3 has 24 characters, right?
>
> Uh, whatever. Is this supposed to detract from the main point that
>SSF2T has more characters with more moves and a larger diversity in style
>than does SFA? No? Then please stay on track.
Oh, gee, sorry. Didn't think that you could ignore my wisecracks.
>>These sound just as ignorant as if I said "Zangief is nothing but a ticker,"
>>or "Guile is the mother of all turtles." By the way, I wonder why you say
>>that Sodom (my favorite SFA character, despite the name and despite the
>>Standing Roundhouse) is a terribly implemented design. He was my first
>>choice for taking on FB/DP old-schoolers.
>
> First I'd like to compliment you on dodging my central point about
>SFA retaining the somewhat less interesting SF2 character designs. Never
>pick a fight you know you can't win.
I didn't bother to mention it because I happen to agree with you on that point.
I didn't want to type much more than was necessary; after all, I'm on a modem
connection, and my roommates do want to use the phone.
Oh, but I forgot, you take comments (and lack thereof) seriously. Well, don't
worry about it, so do I.
>But as for calling my characterizations
>of the SFA fighting styles "ignorant"... Perhaps I should clarify. If you
>want to *win*, then you play them with repetitive boring and simple tactics.
>If you are just fooling around constantly, then feel free to use a couple of
>other moves. And incidentally, Zangief *is* nothing but a ticker. It's
>just that he is typically forced to use his entire arsenal of moves and
>a lot of head games to bring out his strengths. Don't try and talk to me
>about variety in playing styles. Your comments about Sodom alone betray
>you. This is where I play the "elitist" card you seem to have given me,
>and just move on.
You admit that Zangier is nothing but a ticker, and yet you also say that he
has to use his "entire arsenal of moves?" I'll tell you the same thing about
Sodom, and you'll just say that Sodom was only given stupid tactics, (see
below)
> Why is Sodom a terrible character? I don't say terrible in the
>sense that he can't or doesn't win. He is decent overall, and in scrub-level
>competition, he wins a lot. But he is a crap design. Uh, let's give him
>a stupid slide you can't retaliate against and that goes under FBs perfectly.
>How about a no-brainer cr. fierce air defense? Blah blah blah. Sodom is
>completely flat, and the essence of thoughtless character design. Yeah,
>he wins, but for extremely stupid reasons, which require no real strategy
>or forethought whatsoever.
Stupid slide? Why don't people throw slow fireballs which are more difficult
to slide under? Air defense? You don't complain about Vega's no-brainer air
defense? Oh, but Vega is an excellent design, and Sodom isn't.
Seems like you demand more detailed arguments than what I have time to make.
Oh, and by the way, everyone is biased one way or another, but that doesn't
mean that you should get carried away in biased arguments.
Anyway, Sodom is not as flat as you might think. I can totally control the
game by getting next to an opponent and varying my chain combos, but I've got
to watch for the possible Alpha Counter or wake-up Dragon Punch. If either is
imminent, I'll just hang back just a bit and let my opponent call the next
move. I can't always jump in, for fear of eating an anti-air move, but Sodom's
low hang-time still comes in useful for jumping at projectile throwers. Also,
if I'm half-way across the screen, I can execute a random Carpet Bomb and catch
my opponent off-guard, since Sodom does have better range on that move than
people think.
And on, and on. Thoughtless character design, right.
>>Corner traps.
>
>>Oh, here comes one fireball as I get up. Might as well block it. Oh, here
>>comes another. I'll just jump straight up, since if I jump towards him, I'll
>>eat a DP. Oh, whoops, silly me, he threw a slow fireball, and I didn't have
>>to clairvoyance to see it. Man, I must really stink.
>
> God, you really are a scrub. I know, not a happy argumentative move,
>but after this, I really can't not say it. You imply that corner traps are
>somehow "unfair", and that this justifies air-blocking?
No, not really. Read on.
>Geez. Overlooking
>the fact that you (again) have failed to mention a significant number of
>characters that are FB corner-trappable, this is still a garbage complaint.
>Where do you start off in SSF2T? In the middle of the board. Why are you
>now in the corner? Because 1) you are foolish, and have put yourself here
>of your own free will (ironically, this can actually be a good move in SFA
>at times) 2) you have been *pushed* into the corner by the controlling play
>of your opponent. Being able to control the opponents motion is a signal
>of SKILL.
Perhaps, but isn't it also easy just to throw a lucky sweep, then throw a
projectile and push your opponent back as he gets up and blocks it?
>The corner trap embodies the *essence* of the positional play,
>and why it is so important and often subtle.
> So, after being bullied through the superior skill of your opponent
>into the corner, you now have to play a *gasp* guessing game, where you
>could theoretically be forced to land on a FB! Heavens to betsy! Quick,
>change the game engine to account for this horrible imbalance! Further, in
>almost any corner trap situation, if the trapper becomes predictable, he
>will pay. It's just that the guessing game is in his favor, which he has
>earned by forcing you into a disadvantageous position.
So first you knock on SFA for being "merely" a guessing game without any
strategy, and now you praise SSF2T corner traps, even though you admit it
becomes a guessing game?
I realize there are ways to get out of the corner, and yes, I'm pretty good at
escaping corner traps, thank you. But if corner traps are tough to get out of,
as you say, then the entire tide of the match goes to the player who can force
his opponent into the corner first. Yes, I also realize that the victory goes
to the player who can control the pace of the match.
That really is the essence of positional play, but it isn't as subtle as you
think. In fact, it's a little too much like a positional game, in my opinion.
Yeah, you say that the SF series should be more a game of strategy than of
reactionary tactics, but once again, that's a preference, not an advantage.
SFA changes the game from a positional one to a game of reflexes and tactics
without sacrificing too much of the SF flavor. I could elaborate, but then
this would be an argument in Game Theory 505, right?
> This is actually funny. Do any of these tactics start with chains?
>No. The effective part is some other trickiness, usually with the over-
>powered elbow drop (which is most of why he is strong). The chain is only
>"filler". If chains were absent, he'd presumably have some other normal
>move which he could still combo into something else to do damage. Chains
>don't create anything new at all here. They just substitute.
[snip!]
> More variety? With chains? Dud. Everyone has a best chain for
>the situation. You always use the best chain, unless you are dumb. These
>chains consist of idiotically just tapping out a series of buttons. Sure,
>now Ryu/Ken can do all sorts of "different" combos with standing shorts or
>forwards or whatever, but there is still a best thing to do, and everything
>else is just a mistake on your part. It's like KI in that sense: Yeah,
>there are a ton of combos, but you only really need to know 2 or 3 max.
>to have the top ability.
I see what you are saying. Chains are nothing more than combo inflation.
After all, why institute chains when you can just make single hits cause just
as much damage as a chain?
Once again, its that preference thing. That says nothing about why chains are
just there for scrubs. Yeah, chains might contribute nothing else than combo
inflation, but to me, they're a lot more fun to do. I say "variety" in this
sense not as "variety in tactics" (or did I? Sorry if I did). I meant
"variety" in character styles.
I agree with you somewhat on the "filler" aspect, but why should they be taken
out? There are times when you aren't in a position to execute the whole chain,
like when you are afraid that the first few hits will push the opponent too far
away for the last hit. Realizing this, it may be safer to rely on single hits
than chains. In this sense, chains aren't merely a filler, they become a
tactic that involves a certain risk of missing.
>>Maybe not, but you're portraying SFA as nothing more than another KI. "They
>>win for stupid and banal reasons." It's that bias against SFA that really
>>confuses me, considering how much genuine trash is out there in the arcades
>>these days.
>
> SFA is better than a lot of other games. But this is a.g.SF2, so
>I figured I wouldn't need to compare it to the other 8billion fighters
>out there. Especially since it is obviously inferior to another game
>within the obvious domain of discussion, SSF2T. And incidentally, while
>SFA is better than the entire MK series, and KI, and some others, it is
>vastly worse than VF2, or PR, and possibly even things like MSH.
Vastly worse than Primal Rage? Oh, that's your preference.
>>On it's own terms? SFA does have airblocking, Alpha Counters, chains, and
>>these are the very things that people complain about. However, I don't see
>>these new features as mistakes; I see them as an opportunity to get used to a
>>different game engine.
>
> Fine. I didn't call them mistakes in and of themselves, but their
>implementation is a step backwards for gameplay, which I call a mistake. When
>the problems are fixed, then defend it. You can't expect to defend some
>idealized version of SFA which does not exist.
Yes, I can. I've already made a few jabs at the "poor implementation"
argument. I consider SFA to have implemented these features rather well. Yes,
there are nuances and failures in their implementation, but overall, I find the
benefits outweigh the detriments (is that the right word)?
I can also defend some "idealized version of SFA" because these arguments are
key to what goes into future Capcom games. Without a defense for SFA, Capcom
may read these newsgroups and get the notion that fans want yet another SSF2T.
>>I see nothing cheap or novice about any of these
>>features, since for every "dumb" tactic that you can site in SFA, I can think
>>of a few ways to counter it.
>
> Okay, how about Ken's roll trap, just for starters? It's not
>uncounterable, and to pretend that's what I'm saying is foolish. All
>tactics have counters, but the counters are disproportionately difficult
>relative to the difficulty of the attack. It is very easy to just keep
>sliding with Rose, but you have to work way too hard to prevent this in
>general. But I too can think of a way to counter most everything in SFA:
>AC. This of course is also a problem, because the counters are too generic
>and simple. But that's SFA.
You make it sound like AC's grow on trees.
Anyway, how tough is it to stop Rose from sliding? Maybe we don't have good
Rose players here, but if I block a Rose sweep, 50% of the time her recovery is
just long enough that I can get a counter-sweep in. It's not that hard.
I'd also imagine that Ken's roll trap is also not that hard to counter, but
I've never had anyone try it on me. I would imagine that all you have to do is
throw Short sweeps, since his roll isn't invulnerable to normal ground attacks.
>>There's nothing really wrong with SSF2T in itself, but in the context of the
>>whole picture, it really has become the best of a very old game engine.
>>That's why I prefer SFA over SSF2T.
>
> Um, the second sentence does not follow from the first, unless you
>make the embarrassing implication that newness equates with being grounds
>for preference. Do you constantly go out and try new foods, or do you find
>yourself eating some of your favorites most of the time? Is chess a worse
>game than some newer game on the grounds that it is extremely old? A good
>game is a good game, no matter how old. A bad game is bad, no matter how
>new. SSF2T is good. SFA is bad. That's about as simple as I can make it.
Yet again, that preference thing. I already said many times that SFA is a
great game, and maybe I even justified that once or twice. Yes, I consider
SSF2T a great game. I consider SFA a great game. The only reason why I like
SFA over SSF2T is because I've been playing SSF2T for over four years, and I
was looking for a change in pace. To take computer games as an analogy, I
think Civilization is a great game, perhaps one of the greatest, but I don't
play it anymore precisely because it is so old. (Maybe I'll have a smack of
nostalgia one day, load up Civ on my computer again, and start playing it.)
> That is a very weak position to take. I say all crows are black.
>You say, "no, that's not true. Given enough time, we will find a non-black
>crow." Of course, I cannot disprove you out of hand, but as many people
>who dislike SFA have been playing SF for MANY years, they are thusly
>qualified to judge the relative merits of each succession. SFA is no babe
>in the woods, and these supposes fabulous strategies are not as yet
>forthcoming. Why don't you go develop a few, then post them....
I guess you're not going to be the first person to rush in and read them if I
do develop a few new fabulous strategies and post them.
Try the SFA FAQ, which I maintain. When I revised it, I added quite a few
strategies for the newer characters like Guy, Sodom, Adon, etc. If you like,
you are welcome to read it and rip on the strategies that I've mentioned, but
if you want to continue being ignorant, who am I to change that?
Allen Kim
>
>> Because the way people on this newsgroup malign SFA, they make it seem like
>> SFA is the worst game of all time.
>
>(sorry, I know, I said I'd calm down ^_^)
You seriously think that Time Killers is better than SFA?
Oh, wait a minute, you said that before sarcastically ...
Seth James Killian
>> Uh, whatever. Is this supposed to detract from the main point that
>>SSF2T has more characters with more moves and a larger diversity in style
>>than does SFA? No? Then please stay on track.
>Oh, gee, sorry. Didn't think that you could ignore my wisecracks.
Wisecrack or not, SSF2T *murders* SFA in the number and quality of
characters. This single fact alone is enough to make it a superior game.
>I didn't bother to mention it because I happen to agree with you on that point.
I'm glad, because it is a fact.
>You admit that Zangier is nothing but a ticker, and yet you also say that he
>has to use his "entire arsenal of moves?" I'll tell you the same thing about
>Sodom, and you'll just say that Sodom was only given stupid tactics, (see
>below)
Again, you are confused. The fact that Zangief is essentially a
ticker is not incompatible with the claim that he needs to use all of his
moves to be effective. Now, you could say this about Sodom, but it isn't
true. You need to: Slide, do the standing RH, cr. fierce jumping opponents,
and hit the oppoenent with your choice of otherwise useless moves when he
leaves himself open. With Zangief, you need to SPD as much as you can.
Unfortunately, he doesn't have a brainless but effective approach like the
slide, so he is forced to play interesting positional games and use different
moves.
>Stupid slide? Why don't people throw slow fireballs which are more difficult
>to slide under? Air defense? You don't complain about Vega's no-brainer air
>defense? Oh, but Vega is an excellent design, and Sodom isn't.
Right. SFA defeats the no-brainer slide by making slow FB somewhat
harder (re: not pitifully simple, and requiring some vague sense of timing).
Now that's depth. But what about people without FBs? He can still just
keep sliding at them. Vega? Who was talking about Vega? Despite the fact
that his air defense (I assume you are talking about the flipkick) is
pretty simple, it is still harder to use than a damned cr. fierce, if for
no other reason than that it has to be charged. But as it happens, I think
the flipkick was a bad and unnecessary addition to Vega in SSF2T. He didn't
need it, and it runs contrary to his general style. Vega is a very
interesting design, in himself. I also think they screwed up with the off the
wall dive being overpowered, but this is another discussion. Vega is actually
a good example of an SFA-like character in SSF2T. Sure, he may have lots of
tricky little things he can do, but they made certain stupid tactics (like
going off the wall repeatedly) overly powerful, so if you want to win, you
basically just do that.
>Seems like you demand more detailed arguments than what I have time to make.
>Oh, and by the way, everyone is biased one way or another, but that doesn't
>mean that you should get carried away in biased arguments.
I probably do demand more detailed arguments than you have time for.
Genuine discussion of the issues is usually not easily captured in short
snippets. But, for the record, I don't think these detailed arguments for
SFA exist.
>Anyway, Sodom is not as flat as you might think. I can totally control the
>game by getting next to an opponent and varying my chain combos, but I've got
>to watch for the possible Alpha Counter or wake-up Dragon Punch. If either is
>imminent, I'll just hang back just a bit and let my opponent call the next
>move. I can't always jump in, for fear of eating an anti-air move, but Sodom's
>low hang-time still comes in useful for jumping at projectile throwers. Also,
>if I'm half-way across the screen, I can execute a random Carpet Bomb and catch
>my opponent off-guard, since Sodom does have better range on that move than
>people think.
Wow. That is some in-depth stuff. Get next to your opponent, and
then attack... or don't! Strategy at it's height. Also, you execute random
carpet bombs! I am both terrified and awed by the rigor and wilyness of your
SFA play. I hope I never face you.
>And on, and on. Thoughtless character design, right.
Yeah, right. Your tactics are 1) not Sodom specific, but rather just
generally bland things you would do with anyone 2) rather ineffective.
[corner traps are unfair discussion deleted]
>Perhaps, but isn't it also easy just to throw a lucky sweep, then throw a
>projectile and push your opponent back as he gets up and blocks it?
Uh, I guess. What is the point? First, you know it's both not
easy to catch someone with a "lucky" sweep, and it's a bad idea to try
and keep throwing random sweeps. Further, even assuming you did just
"get lucky", then the opponent isn't pushed into the corner by this one
mistake. It would take several such instances, in which case it isn't
luck, but a genuine screw-up.
>>The corner trap embodies the *essence* of the positional play,
>>and why it is so important and often subtle.
>> So, after being bullied through the superior skill of your opponent
>>into the corner, you now have to play a *gasp* guessing game, where you
>>could theoretically be forced to land on a FB! Heavens to betsy! Quick,
>>change the game engine to account for this horrible imbalance! Further, in
>>almost any corner trap situation, if the trapper becomes predictable, he
>>will pay. It's just that the guessing game is in his favor, which he has
>>earned by forcing you into a disadvantageous position.
>So first you knock on SFA for being "merely" a guessing game without any
>strategy, and now you praise SSF2T corner traps, even though you admit it
>becomes a guessing game?
It is a calculated guessing game, with odds in your favor based on
your skill rather than genuinely unpredictable tricks that take no skill
to execute. It can be very hard to react to Akuma's overhead in SFA. You
are claiming that this tactic is equally worthy as slowly pushing someone
into the corner with careful a thought-out positional play, taking calculated
risks to maximize your advantage? You are wrong.
>I realize there are ways to get out of the corner, and yes, I'm pretty good at
>escaping corner traps, thank you. But if corner traps are tough to get out of,
>as you say, then the entire tide of the match goes to the player who can force
>his opponent into the corner first. Yes, I also realize that the victory goes
>to the player who can control the pace of the match.
>That really is the essence of positional play, but it isn't as subtle as you
>think. In fact, it's a little too much like a positional game, in my opinion.
Why is it "too much"? Because you wish you could just hit the
buttons without having to think about what is going on? You don't like
being punished for mistakes? You like high-variance guessing games that
can reduce things to ridiculous rock/paper/scissors routines?
>Yeah, you say that the SF series should be more a game of strategy than of
>reactionary tactics, but once again, that's a preference, not an advantage.
>SFA changes the game from a positional one to a game of reflexes and tactics
>without sacrificing too much of the SF flavor. I could elaborate, but then
>this would be an argument in Game Theory 505, right?
SFA definitely has the SF2 "flavor", but it lacks what made SF2 so
great, which was the positional play. If you don't prefer that, I can't
see what you like about SF2 to begin with. I think SS has a cooler overall
feel, but the gameplay is trash. If you prefer games of relexes over
strategy, I think you would be better off at the air-hockey table.
>I see what you are saying. Chains are nothing more than combo inflation.
>After all, why institute chains when you can just make single hits cause just
>as much damage as a chain?
Right.
>Once again, its that preference thing. That says nothing about why chains are
>just there for scrubs. Yeah, chains might contribute nothing else than combo
>inflation, but to me, they're a lot more fun to do. I say "variety" in this
>sense not as "variety in tactics" (or did I? Sorry if I did). I meant
>"variety" in character styles.
Yes, this could legitimately be a preference thing, but I still think
a case can be made for (if nothing else) poor SFA implementation of chains.
>I agree with you somewhat on the "filler" aspect, but why should they be taken
>out? There are times when you aren't in a position to execute the whole chain,
>like when you are afraid that the first few hits will push the opponent too far
>away for the last hit. Realizing this, it may be safer to rely on single hits
>than chains. In this sense, chains aren't merely a filler, they become a
>tactic that involves a certain risk of missing.
There is no "risk" here. The only risk is introduced by your lack
of knowledge given the facts about the game. With time/practice the "risk"
you are talking about ceases to exist.
>Vastly worse than Primal Rage? Oh, that's your preference.
Nope. I could make a great case for why PR is much better than SFA.
But if you can't even see that SSF2T is better than SFA, I imagine it would
be mostly lost on you. And of course, there are time considerations :) I
think PR looks rather weak, and I don't "identify" with any of the characters,
but the gameplay is really innovative and overall excellent. Unfortunately,
almost no one took the time to explore it. You have no idea what you are
talking about here.
>> Fine. I didn't call them mistakes in and of themselves, but their
>>implementation is a step backwards for gameplay, which I call a mistake. When
>>the problems are fixed, then defend it. You can't expect to defend some
>>idealized version of SFA which does not exist.
>Yes, I can. I've already made a few jabs at the "poor implementation"
>argument. I consider SFA to have implemented these features rather well. Yes,
>there are nuances and failures in their implementation, but overall, I find the
>benefits outweigh the detriments (is that the right word)?
How can you agree that the new additions are poorly implemented and
then say that the benefits outweigh the detriments? I don't know what game
you are talking about. I am talking about the SFA that was in the arcades
and now on Saturn, etc. In *that* game (not the "Ideal SFA"), ACs suck,
airblocking is badly done, chains are stupid, etc.
>I can also defend some "idealized version of SFA" because these arguments are
>key to what goes into future Capcom games. Without a defense for SFA, Capcom
>may read these newsgroups and get the notion that fans want yet another SSF2T.
You can defend the ideal SFA only if you can explain what it consists
of, which you have utterly failed to do as yet.
>> Okay, how about Ken's roll trap, just for starters? It's not
>>uncounterable, and to pretend that's what I'm saying is foolish. All
>>tactics have counters, but the counters are disproportionately difficult
>>relative to the difficulty of the attack. It is very easy to just keep
>>sliding with Rose, but you have to work way too hard to prevent this in
>>general. But I too can think of a way to counter most everything in SFA:
>>AC. This of course is also a problem, because the counters are too generic
>>and simple. But that's SFA.
>You make it sound like AC's grow on trees.
They are around enough to be a signifcant problem.
>Anyway, how tough is it to stop Rose from sliding? Maybe we don't have good
>Rose players here, but if I block a Rose sweep, 50% of the time her recovery is
>just long enough that I can get a counter-sweep in. It's not that hard.
You don't have any good Roses, as you suggested. You cannot counter-
sweep it unless she is right on top of you when she slides, and the percentage
of times you can counter (with anything) is far below 50%. You don't even
know this, and you maintain the advanced SFA FAQ?
>I'd also imagine that Ken's roll trap is also not that hard to counter, but
>I've never had anyone try it on me. I would imagine that all you have to do is
>throw Short sweeps, since his roll isn't invulnerable to normal ground attacks.
You imagine very wrongly. That won't stop it. Seriously, stop being
a scrub who isn't even passingly familiar with strong SFA play, and then try
and comment on these things. I nominate someone (anyone) else to maintain
the "strategy" FAQ. The rolltrap is sick, and your wizened suggestion is
"do short kicks!".
>Yet again, that preference thing. I already said many times that SFA is a
>great game, and maybe I even justified that once or twice. Yes, I consider
Maybe you even justified it. Maybe not. This need not be a
preference thing. There is (I thought) common ground. I thought you
liked stategy/position games, because that is what good SF2 has always been.
If you admit you are just interested in mindless reflex trades, then fine,
SFA is a great game on those terms.
>SSF2T a great game. I consider SFA a great game. The only reason why I like
>SFA over SSF2T is because I've been playing SSF2T for over four years, and I
>was looking for a change in pace. To take computer games as an analogy, I
>think Civilization is a great game, perhaps one of the greatest, but I don't
>play it anymore precisely because it is so old. (Maybe I'll have a smack of
>nostalgia one day, load up Civ on my computer again, and start playing it.)
Civ is a dumb game. Chess is a good game. It is old, and still
played all too hell. If you are going to set up something to criticize, you
don't help yourself by picking on something as weak as Civ when there are
obviously better candidates.
>I guess you're not going to be the first person to rush in and read them if I
>do develop a few new fabulous strategies and post them.
On the contrary. I would love to be wrong about SFA. I would love
to discover worlds of complex tricks and traps. Unfortunately, they aren't
there. Post them.
>Try the SFA FAQ, which I maintain. When I revised it, I added quite a few
>strategies for the newer characters like Guy, Sodom, Adon, etc. If you like,
>you are welcome to read it and rip on the strategies that I've mentioned, but
>if you want to continue being ignorant, who am I to change that?
I'm sure you have strategies. I've read your FAQ. But they aren't
*winning* strategies. The winning strategies in SFA are very, very simple
usually. And seeing as you maintain the FAQ and all, I suggest you look
into some actually winning strategies. If not, you might as well just go
for style, such as the all taunting Dan style, instead of the passe slop
you've got right now. Please, call me ignorant again while you tell me
how short kicks stop the roll trap, and you can sweep Rose after her slide
50% of the time.
Seth Killian
Allen J Klein
> : simplifications. Check out my version of the SFA FAQ if you want a few.
>
> SFA may have more strategy involved than I have given it credit for, but the
> truth of the matter is, it is not needed to win at SFA. Simple strategies
> are efficient enough to win.
Hey! Sagat and Adon are still interesting! Heck, without the duck
short + duck strong chain, I'm going to have to pull wins out of my ass
more than ever before with Jaguar Boy.
Sure hope it's a little easier to hit air attacks cleanly with the tiger
uppercut...
Kuroyume
: Seth James Killian@stude
: > So, after being bullied through the superior skill of your opponent
: > into the corner, you now have to play a *gasp* guessing game, where you
: > could theoretically be forced to land on a FB! Heavens to betsy! Quick,
: > change the game engine to account for this horrible imbalance! Further, in
: > almost any corner trap situation, if the trapper becomes predictable, he
: > will pay. It's just that the guessing game is in his favor, which he has
: > earned by forcing you into a disadvantageous position.
: Especially, if you are Ryu, it is a MISTAKE to corner trap E.Honda
: because he'll easily hop over all of your fireballs and nail you with
: that huge jump roundhouse. The trick to fighting Honda with Ryu is to
: avoid ever throwing a fireball and go for some ticks! (esp. in SSF2T!)
Ha ha... you're so funny, I forgot to laugh.
For me hopping over fireballs was not too much of a problem. Sure I landed on
many and it annoyed me. But it was in the game and I had to live with it. Soon
enough I developed a knowledge of determining whether it was safe to jump a
FB or not.
Now that I have lived with airblocking FBs for the past 6 months or so on SFA,
I have grown to accept it. So for the third or fourth time: "I DON'T MIND AIR-
BLOCKING FBs!!!" Okay? Comprende? Wakaru? Kapish?
My complaint with airblocking is with blocking non-FB attacks. It encourages
turtling... [see my response to Mr. Kim for my explanation]
To sum up my views on airblocking, I give you my preferences in order or favorable
to least favorable...
1] Airblock FBs only [slight edge over #2]
2] No airblocking [very large edge over #3]
3] current airblocking system
That's my complaint. Not too difficult for anyone to understand.
BTW, I wonder how qualified you are to talk about Honda. Sure, you could be
some great Honda master that I've never heard about, but I seriously doubt that.
SSF2T is such a deep game that when you've TRUELY mastered a character, IMO, you
can take any character no matter how disadvantaged the fight may be. I think
that you think that Honda doesn't stand a snowball's chance in hell against Ryu.
True Ryu has a pretty good advantage over Honda, but I've played enough Honda and
have played against enough Ryu's to bring the odds to about 50/50 against
excellent Ryu players.
I think you need a good ass-kicking by Honda to quiet you down, boy. [to everyone
else, I apologize for the blast of egotism here, but Mr. Klein is blowing too
much hot air here.]
: jk
: --
: 0UY0T allen jamie klein S1HT0D yow! 3MT3LU0Y yan...@cmu.edu 0DYHW
Like you said, the only things we differ on about SFA, is 1] the airblocking
system and 2] the greatness of SFA.
A modified AC, modified Airblocking and no chain-combos might put SFA right up
there with SSF2T. [very close to it, at least]
Allen J Klein
> >
> >> Because the way people on this newsgroup malign SFA, they make it
seem like
> >> SFA is the worst game of all time.
> >
> >But it IS the worst game of all time. Christ, Time Killers is better.
> >(sorry, I know, I said I'd calm down ^_^)
>
> You seriously think that Time Killers is better than SFA?
>
> Oh, wait a minute, you said that before sarcastically ...
When I write shit like that, I'm trying to give an example of how many
people out there who prefer SSF2T to SFA give that "preference" too much
weight and make it sound like "if it's not exactly like SSF2T, it's
dogshit."
Allen J Klein
on SFA,
> I have grown to accept it. So for the third or fourth time: "I DON'T
MIND AIR-
> BLOCKING FBs!!!" Okay? Comprende? Wakaru? Kapish?
Wakatta -- jyoudan dake. C'est pas grave.
> I think you need a good ass-kicking by Honda to quiet you down, boy.
[to everyo
> ne
> else, I apologize for the blast of egotism here, but Mr. Klein is blowing too
> much hot air here.]
In 100% non-sarcasm mode, I really think that Honda can be a strong,
interesting character. Althogh I never figured out how to avoid landing
on Ryu/Ken duck roundhouses (yeah... I BITE!!!) I did play him (as well
as everyone else in the game except Ryu and T.Hawk) quite a bit. My
proudest moment was ending a Scott Bradburn winning streak with my Sumo
(hey, when you're a scrub like me, you take what you can get ^_^)
Honda ticks in SSF2T are MEAN! Love it!
Chris Finnie
> This is actually funny. Do any of these tactics start with chains?
>No. The effective part is some other trickiness, usually with the over-
>powered elbow drop (which is most of why he is strong). The chain is only
>"filler". If chains were absent, he'd presumably have some other normal
>move which he could still combo into something else to do damage. Chains
>don't create anything new at all here. They just substitute.
Just want to add that because of Chains in SFA, Guy's low short did
100% effective damage. Chain into a 5 hits combo, redizzy until dead.
chris f
J Chensor
(Seth James Killian) wrote:
> Wisecrack or not, SSF2T *murders* SFA in the number and quality of
> characters. This single fact alone is enough to make it a superior game.
SFA's fighters are very poorly designed. Although you can list uses
for almost all of their normal moves, they just aren't used that often.
The priorities of normal moves are TOTALLY screwed up in SFA... moves
ALWAYS stop things rather than the very picky positional play of ST. If
someone jumps at you with Ryu, his Crouch Fierce ALWAYS stops you. No
matter what. Period. The characters and moves of SFA are rather no
brainer so that Seth is absolutely right when he says that ST's characters
MURDER SFA's characters. In ST, certain moves only worked in limited
ranges, spaces, and positions (say Honda... if someone jumped from far
away from you, Honda was very lost for air counters. At a 45 degree
angle, Honda could try a Neutral Joystick Roundhouse. If they were right
above you, Neutral Joystick Fierce. Lots of variety and positional play.
With most characters in SFA, it's one button and one button only).
> Again, you are confused. The fact that Zangief is essentially a
> ticker is not incompatible with the claim that he needs to use all of his
> moves to be effective. Now, you could say this about Sodom, but it isn't
> true. You need to: Slide, do the standing RH, cr. fierce jumping opponents,
> and hit the oppoenent with your choice of otherwise useless moves when he
> leaves himself open. With Zangief, you need to SPD as much as you can.
> Unfortunately, he doesn't have a brainless but effective approach like the
> slide, so he is forced to play interesting positional games and use different
> moves.
Zangief was the epitome of skilled play. Because he was such a poor
character in ST (this will be argued I'm sure), it was a great testament
to the players who could successfully approach and pull of a SPD. Calling
him a "ticker" isn't fair because he probably drains 75% of the enemy's
energy through regular hits to finally GET to the enemy. Then, after a
well timed SPD, he can finish the enemy off.
[Stuff about Sodom and Vega deleted]
I think Sodom is much more deep and has a lot more strategy than most
people think, but a deep character from SFA equals a shallow character
from ST so I won't argue in Sodom's favor.
And yes, Vega is a bad character in ST.
> It is a calculated guessing game, with odds in your favor based on
> your skill rather than genuinely unpredictable tricks that take no skill
> to execute. It can be very hard to react to Akuma's overhead in SFA. You
> are claiming that this tactic is equally worthy as slowly pushing someone
> into the corner with careful a thought-out positional play, taking calculated
> risks to maximize your advantage? You are wrong.
Why even talk about corner trapping in ST? Only Ryu did it. Ken was
poor at it, Guile was poor at it, Chun was poor at it, Deejay was poor at
it, And Sagat's FB traps worked better when he was far away. Ryu was the
only person who did it so saying that ST was poor because of ONE
character's FB traps is a poor thing to argue. Meanwhile, problems with
SFA are not exclusive to certain characters. Overheads, ACs, and
way-too-high-prioritied moves are problems from LOTS of characters.
> >I realize there are ways to get out of the corner,and yes, I'm pretty
good at
> >escaping corner traps,thank you. But if corner traps are tough to get
out of,
> >as you say,then the entire tide of the match goes to the player who can
force
> >his opponent into the corner first.
Not true. Only RYU. Ryu is the only person who benefits THAT much
from corner trapping. Other characters, like Bison, Chun, Fei, or Cammy
(the guys who constantly poke away at you) also benefit from corner
traps. But guys like Guile, Honda, and Sagat thrived in corners. A lot
of characters thrived in BOTH places. Talking about corner trapping in ST
is poor because it rarely happens and practically exclusively with Ryu.
> can reduce things to ridiculous rock/paper/scissors routines?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Why is it when I see that, all I can hear is, "CO-CO-CO-CO-COMBO BREAKER!!"
> >Once again, its that preference thing. That says nothing about why
chains are
> >just there for scrubs. Yeah, chains might contribute nothing else than
combo
> >inflation, but to me, they're a lot more fun to do. I say "variety" in this
> >sense not as "variety in tactics" (or did I? Sorry if I did). I meant
> >"variety" in character styles.
Chains offer more variety in CHARACTER STYLES? How so?
> >You make it sound like AC's grow on trees.
They don't. But you know what? At the end of a round, all it takes
is ONE damn AC to ruin all hopes of come-backs and strategic gameplay. In
ST, good skill could get someone from zero vital to victory against an
enemy with full energy. In SFA, it's all but hopeless. So AC's are THAT
bad in the midst of battle, it's at the END of rounds where they REALLY
suck. And who needs DPs with ACs for charactes like Bison?
> >I'd also imagine that Ken's roll trap is also not that hard to counter, but
> >I've never had anyone try it on me.I would imagine that all you have to
do is
> >throw Short sweeps, since his roll isn't invulnerable to ground attacks.
That won't work. After Low Roundhouse, Jab Roll, your block stun
lasts long enough so that if you try and Low Short after the block stun
ends, Ken's Low Short is already coming out and will stuff your Low
Short. Haven't you played against a Roll Trapping Ken yet? I thought
Roll Trapping Kens spread like a disease already...
SFA's biggest problem is over-simplification. Before, in ST, combos
were a complicated feature and if you managed to get one of, you were
specil. Now, they are so mindless that if you DON'T pull off combos,
you're a loser. Countering has been oversimplified with ACs. before, it
actualyl took risks and skill to counter an attack. Now, it only takes a
block, which is the safest thing to do in the game. Before, the priority
of moves made it so that only certain moves applied to VERY specific
situations depending on distance, positioning, and timing. Nowadays, one
move does it all. Before, it took a LONG time to master a character.
Now, it takes almost no time at all. SFA is a poor game, but only
compared to ST. It is still better than 90% of the games out there, I'll
give it that, but it'll never ever ever come anywhere near of being the
great game that Super Turbo was.
- J.C.
--
"Interpretation is the art of making your opinion sound right."
J Chensor
jche...@ucla.edu
(this sig is temporarily under re-construction... my last sig was just WAAAAY too long...)
Brian Chan
> You don't have any good Roses, as you suggested. You cannot counter-
>sweep it unless she is right on top of you when she slides, and the percentage
>of times you can counter (with anything) is far below 50%. You don't even
>know this, and you maintain the advanced SFA FAQ?
>>I'd also imagine that Ken's roll trap is also not that hard to counter, but
>>I've never had anyone try it on me. I would imagine that all you have to do is
>>throw Short sweeps, since his roll isn't invulnerable to normal ground attacks.
> You imagine very wrongly. That won't stop it. Seriously, stop being
>a scrub who isn't even passingly familiar with strong SFA play, and then try
>and comment on these things. I nominate someone (anyone) else to maintain
>the "strategy" FAQ. The rolltrap is sick, and your wizened suggestion is
>"do short kicks!".
Derek Liu maintains the strategy FAQ. Allen Kim maintains the "normal"
SFA FAQ.
I don't mean to insult Mr. Kim, but you're wasting your time if you're
trying to convince him that SFA is inferior to SSF2T. If he didn't
realize that from the start, I doubt any of your arguments about gameplay
is going to have much of an effect. As Chris Finney said, SFA is fun
only for doing flashy combos and stuff. So I can do Guy's 12 hit
in my sleep. Gee, I must be good. :-P
Chris Finnie
>To sum up my views on airblocking, I give you my preferences in order or favorable
>to least favorable...
>
>1] Airblock FBs only [slight edge over #2]
>2] No airblocking [very large edge over #3]
>3] current airblocking system
I'll put in the solution I posted earlier:
Take out airblocking, period. Color-code the FB's so the whiners can
tell what speed is coming out and they can jump accordingly. Red for jab,
Green for strong, blue for fierce. Although some may find this
'solution' humorous, this is actaully serious. Although I do not
have a problem with landing on FB's like some others, some lesser
players may benefit from this, and it would allow airblocking to
be removed.
However a theory for airblocking is that Capcom is simply too lazy to
have to determine priority of air-air attacks, and avoids it by
making air-air priority almost meaningless and saving them a lot of time.
I hope this is not the case because my respect for Capcom is already at
a record-low.
>A modified AC, modified Airblocking and no chain-combos might put SFA right up
>there with SSF2T. [very close to it, at least]
It can only be 'close', not 'up there', unless the SC system in SFA2
is changed. Supers coming every 10 seconds still detract from the game
almost as much as any other of the hated features.
chris f
Allen Kim
says...
>
>Actaully there is absolutley no way to 'counter sweep' Rose, even if
>she slid at you while already in your face. Not even the quickest of
>attacks will hit her; it will be blocked. However you DO get to throw
>hre for free. And about the SFA FAQ, I agree he had no business
>maintaining it.
Thank you. I appreciate such constructive criticism. (sarcasm intended)
Do you know of anyone else that you would nominate to become the new
maintainer of the SFA FAQ? I haven't been able to correct the errors that
exist in the current version because:
1) Busy schedule.
2) There just isn't a demand for a revised SFA FAQ, especially when the
tide of this newsgroup has turned against SFA.
Chris Finnie
>I don't mean to insult Mr. Kim, but you're wasting your time if you're
>trying to convince him that SFA is inferior to SSF2T. If he didn't
>realize that from the start, I doubt any of your arguments about gameplay
>is going to have much of an effect. As Chris Finney said, SFA is fun
>only for doing flashy combos and stuff. So I can do Guy's 12 hit
>in my sleep. Gee, I must be good. :-P
Ugh. I cannot BELIEVE I actually once said I thought SFA was more
fun than ST. Sure I'd just come off a night where I pulled a bunch
of impressive 12-18 hitters in real matches, and I hadn't played ST
in months (frankly I forgot what ST was like), but I went to the
Palace (only ST in town practically) and realized what a mistake I
made. After playing SFA for the last time a couple weeks ago, I
actually felt like pumping quarters into an SNES machine.
chris f
Kuroyume
: Kuro...@rohan.sdsu.edu
[deleted]
: Wakatta -- jyoudan dake. C'est pas grave.
Heh... I've figured out your humor by now!
[deleted]
: In 100% non-sarcasm mode, I really think that Honda can be a strong,
: interesting character. Althogh I never figured out how to avoid landing
: on Ryu/Ken duck roundhouses (yeah... I BITE!!!) I did play him (as well
: as everyone else in the game except Ryu and T.Hawk) quite a bit. My
: proudest moment was ending a Scott Bradburn winning streak with my Sumo
: (hey, when you're a scrub like me, you take what you can get ^_^)
: Honda ticks in SSF2T are MEAN! Love it!
Wait a minute... Don't start saying stuff like this! If you do, I might
have to forget all of our little flame wars... *sigh* Alright...
*Bob disarms his flamethrower, packs it away in a safe spot and is getting
it ready for SFA2!!*
:)
: jk
: --
: 0UY0T allen jamie klein S1HT0D yow! 3MT3LU0Y yan...@cmu.edu 0DYHW
--
Chris Finnie
>>Anyway, how tough is it to stop Rose from sliding? Maybe we don't have good
>>Rose players here, but if I block a Rose sweep, 50% of the time her recovery is
>>just long enough that I can get a counter-sweep in. It's not that hard.
>
> You don't have any good Roses, as you suggested. You cannot counter-
>sweep it unless she is right on top of you when she slides, and the percentage
>of times you can counter (with anything) is far below 50%. You don't even
>know this, and you maintain the advanced SFA FAQ?
Actaully there is absolutley no way to 'counter sweep' Rose, even if
she slid at you while already in your face. Not even the quickest of
attacks will hit her; it will be blocked. However you DO get to throw
hre for free. And about the SFA FAQ, I agree he had no business
maintaining it.
chris f
Allen J Klein
> But if you can't even see that SSF2T is better than SFA, I imagine it would
> be mostly lost on you. And of course, there are time considerations :) I
> think PR looks rather weak, and I don't "identify" with any of the
characters,
> but the gameplay is really innovative and overall excellent. Unfortunately,
> almost no one took the time to explore it. You have no idea what you are
> talking about here.
Pretty neat how Alpha Counters and Chain Combos allowed you to squeeze
Primal Rage between SSF2T and SFA. Or is PR better than the big one
itself, SuperTurbo?
Seth James Killian
>Pretty neat how Alpha Counters and Chain Combos allowed you to squeeze
>Primal Rage between SSF2T and SFA. Or is PR better than the big one
>itself, SuperTurbo?
Since I already know that you are completely not worth the effort
of some fuller exposition, I will try and limit myself. SFA is *not* SSF2T
plus ACs and Chain combos. It's corruption goes far beyond that, even
ignoring the lack of character variety. I believe even you can understand
this, and if not, then it is clearly not worth the time to try and convince
you. SFA is "SF2-esque", and not much more. I will temper these remarks
only by saying it is a good game for showcasing combo ability, and has
fun aspects, but is not a "serious" fighter.
As for PR, it is really hard to say, because there were so very few
players of any calibre anywhere. Fortunately, Ben and I (mostly Ben) were
able to glean a few insights from PRjunkies within the development team
itself. I was very critical initially of PR, and said it was a spaz fest
with Talon being overpowered. In a way, I was right. In the first version,
Talon was overpowered, and the game continues to be somewhat spazzy. The
spaz factor is intentional, to some degree though. PR, unlike any other
fighter to date, is based upon aggression. You win primarily through
attacking, not waiting and countering. They manage this with a number of
features quite different from other games, but which mainly focuses around
it's extremely diverse combo system (more diverse than games like MSH, if
you exclude chains, or are willing to regard them as being substitutable for
a single move with the same effect), and a complex system of priorities
and variable block-stun. This block-stun varies for the same move when
executed at different times and in different contexts. At the highest
level, the game is intensely attack oriented, with all the right sorts of
calculated guessing games you can force the opponent into, and ticking
from hell. The 3 different varieties of jump also factor highly, with none
being the positional throwaway that Xmen/MSH superjumps are.
PR is essentially much different than SSF2T, or any other fighter.
I would not say it is better than SSF2T just because I have no necessary
reason to think it is. That is because it did not develop a strong player
base following, and has also not been fine-tuned in the way SSF2T was.
But on its own, I think the game-engine is capable of producing (and may
in fact already be) a game easily on par with SSF2T and VF2, the only
other competitors even remotely on this level.
Seth Killian
Kuroyume
: >To sum up my views on airblocking, I give you my preferences in order or favorable
: >to least favorable...
: >
: >1] Airblock FBs only [slight edge over #2]
: >2] No airblocking [very large edge over #3]
: >3] current airblocking system
: I'll put in the solution I posted earlier:
: Take out airblocking, period. Color-code the FB's so the whiners can
: tell what speed is coming out and they can jump accordingly. Red for jab,
: Green for strong, blue for fierce. Although some may find this
: 'solution' humorous, this is actaully serious. Although I do not
: have a problem with landing on FB's like some others, some lesser
: players may benefit from this, and it would allow airblocking to
: be removed.
I don't have a great deal of problems landing on FB's either [oops, I'd
better not say this...], but I do see the points of those who do not
like this. However, I like this multi-color FB solution. In a way, it's
a little silly, but I would very much perfer this compared to the current
airblocking system.
: However a theory for airblocking is that Capcom is simply too lazy to
: have to determine priority of air-air attacks, and avoids it by
: making air-air priority almost meaningless and saving them a lot of time.
: I hope this is not the case because my respect for Capcom is already at
: a record-low.
Heh.. I never thought about that. Hmmm, if this is true, it seems like SFA
was more rushed than I previously thought.
: >A modified AC, modified Airblocking and no chain-combos might put SFA right up
: >there with SSF2T. [very close to it, at least]
: It can only be 'close', not 'up there', unless the SC system in SFA2
: is changed. Supers coming every 10 seconds still detract from the game
: almost as much as any other of the hated features.
Sorry. I think I posted that article at 1:00 AM, so my thoughts were not
100% clear. There would still be the matter of decreased throw ranges, no
difference between close and long range attacks, and the issue of number
of characters/interesting characters. [Sodom?] C'mon, he's just plain
silly to look at.
It would be a far better SFA, though.
: chris f
Allen J Klein
Chris Finnie@intergate.b
> have a problem with landing on FB's like some others, some lesser
> players may benefit from this, and it would allow airblocking to
> be removed.
Lesser is too mild a word. If you *EVER* since the first day you played
the game, landed on a fireball with E.Honda, then you most certainly
suck. There is no way around this. Bob Painter, I believe, admitted
that he "occaisionally" lands on fireballs with Honda. From that
information, I can only conclude that he is a total scrub with no skills
at all.
There is no reason Ryu and Ken can ever hit Honda. EVER.
Julien B Beasley
>: interesting character. Althogh I never figured out how to avoid landing
>: on Ryu/Ken duck roundhouses (yeah... I BITE!!!) I did play him (as well
>: as everyone else in the game except Ryu and T.Hawk) quite a bit. My
What? You played that fat loser E. Honda and you never tried T-Hawk?
>: proudest moment was ending a Scott Bradburn winning streak with my Sumo
>: (hey, when you're a scrub like me, you take what you can get ^_^)
>
>: Honda ticks in SSF2T are MEAN! Love it!
They really are. They're just sick. Actually, in HF and Super, Honda's
bear hug + HHS as they get up does more damage than T-Hawk's SPD. This is
*before* the Uchio...
-Julien
--
Stream polished pebbles SF2 Code v1.0: t+ c+ T+ r+(-) f g+
In the mind's still garden pool m+ s+ v+ M+(-) n+:++ o+
Julien B Beasley
wrote:
>Julien B Beasley (j...@mit.edu) wrote:
>: What? You played that fat loser E. Honda and you never tried T-Hawk?
>
>Hey! Hey! Hey! Watch those words, Julien! You don't insult Honda and get
>away with it... Don't make me pull out my flamethrower on you... BTW,
>Honda destroys T.Hawk pretty easily.
Haha Bob. We both know that T.Hawk DESTROYS Honda. I mean, what can that
fat slop do against the crouching "Safe!" strong? Huh? I ask you THAT!
:)
Allen J Klein
> better not say this...], but I do see the points of those who do not
I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll show you every magainze ranking in the
history of SF2 for United States, England, and Japan... hmmm... let's
scan across Classic Ryu's Column until we get to Honda. OOOH, what's
this an 8? Hmm... what does that mean? How about CE Ryu? Whoa a 9!
Maybe things changed in hyper... nope, it's another 8! etc. etc. etc.
(ok ok ok ok, supposedly things changed in SSF2T with the jump up fierce
thingy, was it Mr. Tanaka who posted that this changed the tides of
Gamest ranks? I don't know if this is true or not, but even if it is,
they *TOOK THEIR FUCKING TIME*)
> like this. However, I like this multi-color FB solution. In a way, it's
> a little silly, but I would very much perfer this compared to the current
> airblocking system.
Anyone play old SNES SF2? That had an audible difference in the FBs...
BTW - Give everybody an airthrow... put more air specials in the game...
allow for multi-air attacks as well as mid air counters (although with
air-block stun so as not to make it like SS3)
Plus, put in a good block cancelling system to avoid multi-air attacks
getting overpowered.
Do this, and you have Air Blocking becomming an ASSET, dude!
Seriously...
My feelings:
X-men and MSH: Airblocking BITES!
SS3: Airblocking RUINS THE GAME! (ok, infinte combos are probably
worse, but still...)
SFA: Airblocking is ok.
VH: Airblocking's pretty good!
Kuroyume
: What? You played that fat loser E. Honda and you never tried T-Hawk?
Hey! Hey! Hey! Watch those words, Julien! You don't insult Honda and get
away with it... Don't make me pull out my flamethrower on you... BTW,
Honda destroys T.Hawk pretty easily.
: -Julien
: --
: Stream polished pebbles SF2 Code v1.0: t+ c+ T+ r+(-) f g+
: In the mind's still garden pool m+ s+ v+ M+(-) n+:++ o+
--
Kuroyume
: Kuro...@rohan.sdsu.edu
: > I don't have a great deal of problems landing on FB's either [oops, I'd
: > better not say this...], but I do see the points of those who do not
: I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll show you every magainze ranking in the
: history of SF2 for United States, England, and Japan... hmmm... let's
: scan across Classic Ryu's Column until we get to Honda. OOOH, what's
: this an 8? Hmm... what does that mean? How about CE Ryu? Whoa a 9!
: Maybe things changed in hyper... nope, it's another 8! etc. etc. etc.
: (ok ok ok ok, supposedly things changed in SSF2T with the jump up fierce
: thingy, was it Mr. Tanaka who posted that this changed the tides of
: Gamest ranks? I don't know if this is true or not, but even if it is,
: they *TOOK THEIR FUCKING TIME*)
I'm not exactly sure what you are trying to get at here, but if you are trying
to say that Honda's mid-air fierce that was added in SSF2T is the reason why
I am able to hop FBs with Honda, I would say that it has a lot to do with it.
Although, in previous versions, I had to do without it.
They gave Honda that move in SSF2T [which yes, should have been done earlier]
because of his poor vertical jump [which is realistic because of Honda's
build]. Also, as you probably know, beginning in SSF2, Honda was no longer
able to pass through jab FBs with his leap. With all this against him, they
had to give him something to help him, and yes, it sure did help a lot.
: > like this. However, I like this multi-color FB solution. In a way, it's
: > a little silly, but I would very much perfer this compared to the current
: > airblocking system.
: Anyone play old SNES SF2? That had an audible difference in the FBs...
Yep.
: BTW - Give everybody an airthrow... put more air specials in the game...
: allow for multi-air attacks as well as mid air counters (although with
: air-block stun so as not to make it like SS3)
: Plus, put in a good block cancelling system to avoid multi-air attacks
: getting overpowered.
: Do this, and you have Air Blocking becomming an ASSET, dude!
: Seriously...
Er... giving everyone an airthrow sounds good but the rest of your ideas,
I'm sorry, but I can't agree with. You are making it sound like MSH.
: My feelings:
: X-men and MSH: Airblocking BITES!
And so do those games...
: SS3: Airblocking RUINS THE GAME! (ok, infinte combos are probably
: worse, but still...)
No argument here. SS3 is pure garbage. [nice graphics though] :)
: SFA: Airblocking is ok.
Could be better.
: VH: Airblocking's pretty good!
I'll take your word for it because I really can't stand that game.
: jk
: --
: 0UY0T allen jamie klein S1HT0D yow! 3MT3LU0Y yan...@cmu.edu 0DYHW
--
Kuroyume
: Excerpts from netnews.alt.games.sf2: 22-Feb-96 Re: In defense of SFA by
: > have a problem with landing on FB's like some others, some lesser
: > players may benefit from this, and it would allow airblocking to
: > be removed.
: Lesser is too mild a word. If you *EVER* since the first day you played
: the game, landed on a fireball with E.Honda, then you most certainly
: suck. There is no way around this. Bob Painter, I believe, admitted
: that he "occaisionally" lands on fireballs with Honda. From that
: information, I can only conclude that he is a total scrub with no skills
: at all.
: There is no reason Ryu and Ken can ever hit Honda. EVER.
Exactly right! Throw a FB at Honda? Why? It's impossible for him to land
on it and it is just utter suicide for the Ken/Ryu player. Honda should
win all his rounds in under 10 seconds, no 5 seconds. In fact, Honda is such
a cheap SOB, he should start off every round with just 1 pixel, no wait, no
energy at all. That would make it a fair fight...
Alright, alright, I know you were just saying that to try to prove your
point to Chris, but I just couldn't resist! :) BTW, I thought we stopped
all this stuff anyways, no?
And I've never gone so far as to call you a 'scrub with no skills
whatsoever'... You've hurt my feelings. =~( *wink* *wink*
Poclips
you mean pressing strong on reaction & not mindlessly pressing at it
because any character could counter that. That seems to me like saying :
How can you advance towards Honda huh? If do this I'll do that.... I'm
not saying either characters suck. But, IMHO, I'd put Honda over T.hawk
match 4 match. Maybe if T. Hawk had a basketball move or something. Or a
Mexican bean fart move or something. Or maybe if he could throw is
feather band? Or an Eyebrow stab. HaHaHa. My sick humor amuses me.
Apoc.
Allen J Klein
Kuro...@rohan.sdsu.edu
> all this stuff anyways, no?
Mr. Finney's "lesser player" thing got me started. I'll try to behave
from now on...
d. hall
// thus on 23 Feb 1996 18:56:30 GMT, Kuroyume virtually scripted...
Allen J Klein (aj...@andrew.cmu.edu) wrote:
: Lesser is too mild a word. If you *EVER* since the first day you played
: the game, landed on a fireball with E.Honda, then you most certainly
: suck. There is no way around this. Bob Painter, I believe, admitted
: that he "occaisionally" lands on fireballs with Honda. From that
: information, I can only conclude that he is a total scrub with no skills
: at all.
: There is no reason Ryu and Ken can ever hit Honda. EVER.
Kuroyume> Exactly right! Throw a FB at Honda? Why? It's impossible for
Kuroyume> him to land on it and it is just utter suicide for the Ken/Ryu
Kuroyume> player. Honda should win all his rounds in under 10 seconds, no
Kuroyume> 5 seconds. In fact, Honda is such a cheap SOB, he should start
Kuroyume> off every round with just 1 pixel, no wait, no energy at all.
Kuroyume> That would make it a fair fight...
Kuroyume> Alright, alright, I know you were just saying that to try to
Kuroyume> prove your point to Chris, but I just couldn't resist! :) BTW, I
Kuroyume> thought we stopped all this stuff anyways, no?
The air-blocking system was made in an attempt to change the mode in which
SF was played. The heavy influnence of fireball traps was prevalent in the
mid-level learning curve. Air-blocking would be nice as far as a
positional game if it wasn't instinct based.
1. Air-blocking of ground based moves should be pretty much out of
the question. Attacker is "planted", therefore the move should
_not_ be able to be blocked. This of course excludes the
specials which launch the attackers into the air (including DP
and FK's). but... this leads to possible risk which is
explained briefly.
2. Air-blocking animation delay. In which it actually takes a
couple frames for the person to activate blocking. The
air-block damage could possibly be increased on a factor of 1.5
to double block damage. This is for those who actually use it
for positional play, they jump in with the "intent" of
air-blocking, a common tactic against SFA Gui... er Charlie. I
don't know the number of standing roundhouse's I've eaten at
the latter part of my SFA playing.
3. The main reason why I used air-blocking was with the intent to
roll or throw. The air-block stun pretty much ended at the
point in which the character landed. A common tactic was to
fake the deep flying attack, cancel the stun at point of
landing and throw.
4. Setting up of air-block reel time. Imagine the possible risk of
being hit by a deep in ground attack, sent reeling and hit with
a followup two-in-one fireball. Crouching Fierce into Fireball,
hit them out of air-block into reel frames and then have them
juggled while landing on the insuing fireball.
What would this do to the game? The dynamic would be pretty easy.
d.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface
iQCVAwUBMS7XWYX26urqpgG1AQFiaAP/WTcsWKnmDQLefHIIEvZiT/LhmrdB3HtW
KDEZsizHggxdATpsdbrwVeS+d1lp/74SzKExy+8K1OPgfZC5gOI212iWyYsOsNoO
WFUch8pEUbZEb+tOWzowXMsriW4viBpg2juIFF/SEtL8/PnfGvRsuVFUZG5gE/CC
OR9ttG/E+TU=
=L9nX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
``I saw the slow-moving, sad-faced old gentleman
as he bounced off the hood of my car.''
~ except from an insurance report
Kuroyume
: wrote:
: >Julien B Beasley (j...@mit.edu) wrote:
: >: What? You played that fat loser E. Honda and you never tried T-Hawk?
: >
: >Hey! Hey! Hey! Watch those words, Julien! You don't insult Honda and get
: >away with it... Don't make me pull out my flamethrower on you... BTW,
: >Honda destroys T.Hawk pretty easily.
: Haha Bob. We both know that T.Hawk DESTROYS Honda. I mean, what can that
: fat slop do against the crouching "Safe!" strong? Huh? I ask you THAT!
: :)
WE both know this? Either I am missing something, or you are underestimating
Honda. BTW, don't you remember I told you I play T.Hawk [probably my 3rd or
4th best character?]
Yeah, so he has the crouching "safe" strong... so what? What the hell does
that mean? Honda has the standing 'porkchop' fierce... take that!
:)
: -Julien
: --
: Stream polished pebbles SF2 Code v1.0: t+ c+ T+ r+(-) f g+
: In the mind's still garden pool m+ s+ v+ M+(-) n+:++ o+
--
Kwang Soo Suh
: In article <4gg229$6...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>, skil...@students.uiuc.edu
: (Seth James Killian) wrote:
: > Wisecrack or not, SSF2T *murders* SFA in the number and quality of
: > characters. This single fact alone is enough to make it a superior game.
: SFA's fighters are very poorly designed. Although you can list uses
: for almost all of their normal moves, they just aren't used that often.
: The priorities of normal moves are TOTALLY screwed up in SFA... moves
: ALWAYS stop things rather than the very picky positional play of ST. If
: someone jumps at you with Ryu, his Crouch Fierce ALWAYS stops you. No
: matter what. Period.
Well, actually, a jumping Ken/Ryu/Akuma that does a short will
cancel the crouch fierce at the right range... But I see your
gist. You either miss, or you hit. Whatever happened to double hits?
: Zangief was the epitome of skilled play. Because he was such a poor
: character in ST (this will be argued I'm sure), it was a great testament
: to the players who could successfully approach and pull of a
SPD.
Only poor in the hands of a scrub. Here in Calgary, it's
so scrubby, I think there are 3 people in the whole city who can
SPD.
: And yes, Vega is a bad character in ST.
What's really ironic is that even though Vega was only a
marginally designed character (I wouldn't go as far as saying he
was BAD, I'll leave that for Fei Long), he still kicks ass
compared to the characters in SFA.
: > It is a calculated guessing game, with odds in your favor based on
: > your skill rather than genuinely unpredictable tricks that take no skill
: > to execute. It can be very hard to react to Akuma's overhead in SFA. You
: > are claiming that this tactic is equally worthy as slowly pushing someone
: > into the corner with careful a thought-out positional play, taking calculated
: > risks to maximize your advantage? You are wrong.
: Why even talk about corner trapping in ST? Only Ryu did it. Ken was
: poor at it, Guile was poor at it, Chun was poor at it, Deejay was poor at
: it, And Sagat's FB traps worked better when he was far away.
Hell, even Ryu didn't do it that well. Certainly not
even nearing the insanely repetitive corner traps in earlier
version of SF2.
OTOH, virtually EVERYONE in SFA can corner trap. The
whole game is fundamentally flawed this way. Capcom's lame ass
solution to this was the AC. But, of course, the trapper can AC
just as well as the trapped person, so we're back to square one.
: Chains offer more variety in CHARACTER STYLES? How so?
I suppose it's what makes Guy, but who cares?
: > >You make it sound like AC's grow on trees.
: They don't. But you know what? At the end of a round, all it takes
: is ONE damn AC to ruin all hopes of come-backs and strategic gameplay. In
: ST, good skill could get someone from zero vital to victory against an
: enemy with full energy. In SFA, it's all but hopeless. So AC's are THAT
: bad in the midst of battle, it's at the END of rounds where they REALLY
: suck. And who needs DPs with ACs for charactes like Bison?
: That won't work. After Low Roundhouse, Jab Roll, your block stun
: lasts long enough so that if you try and Low Short after the block stun
: ends, Ken's Low Short is already coming out and will stuff your Low
: Short. Haven't you played against a Roll Trapping Ken yet? I thought
: Roll Trapping Kens spread like a disease already...
Nope. Only I do that trap here, and I never use it.
Only in big cities is that strategy being used commonly.
: SFA's biggest problem is over-simplification. Before, in ST, combos
: were a complicated feature and if you managed to get one of, you were
: specil. Now, they are so mindless that if you DON'T pull off combos,
: you're a loser. Countering has been oversimplified with ACs. before, it
: actualyl took risks and skill to counter an attack.
AC's aren't bad, DS and VH had them, and they didn't
substatially alter gameplay, but SFA just made them way too godlike.
Now, it only takes a
: block, which is the safest thing to do in the game. Before, the priority
: of moves made it so that only certain moves applied to VERY specific
: situations depending on distance, positioning, and timing. Nowadays, one
: move does it all. Before, it took a LONG time to master a character.
: Now, it takes almost no time at all.
Is this a problem with SFA, or a problem with the SF
engine in general? It didn't take me too long to figure out how
to use the new challengers in SSF2T effectively (Bar Cammy, simply because
I didn't find her very interesting). DS hardly took any time
before people were mastering the game, even characters such as
Anakaris and Rukio (two designs that strayed extremely far from
anything done in the SF series).
SFA is a poor game, but only
: compared to ST. It is still better than 90% of the games out there, I'll
: give it that, but it'll never ever ever come anywhere near of being the
: great game that Super Turbo was.
God damn it! You're right! Ahh, how I wish for the days of
complex play.. :( You're also right about how SFA is _still_
better than all the other crap out there, unfortunately.
Another thing I noticed about SFA is that all the characters who
did come back from SSF2T have been "Dumbed Down": Ryu/Ken's
fireballs have longer delays; when you hit a fireball, they take
off mondo damage (Can't you hit with some other, more worthy
move? Hell, we *MADE* them air-blockable, you must be an idiot
for being hit by one, so we're really going to punish you);
Sagat in general sucks; one move per button/joystick position;
Chunli's loooooong fireball release/loooong fireball delay, etc.
It seems like Capcom had to make up for poor character design by
reducing the ablities of the old characters.....
Allen J Klein
J Che...@ucla.edu
> poor at it, Guile was poor at it, Chun was poor at it, Deejay was poor at
> only person who did it so saying that ST was poor because of ONE
> character's FB traps is a poor thing to argue. Meanwhile, problems with
> SFA are not exclusive to certain characters. Overheads, ACs, and
> way-too-high-prioritied moves are problems from LOTS of characters.
Oh yeah, Balrog NEVER trapped his opponents in the corner! NEVER
FUCKING NEVER NEVER NEVER NEVER!
***IF YOU GET TRAPPED IN THE CORNER AGAINST A BALROG PLAYER
YOU_____SUCK____ SUCK SUCK SUCK SUCK***
Balrog, quite simply, I'm sure we all know, it's common knowledge, you
could say, as a matter of fact, CAN'T CORNER TRAP! ********EVER*********
CAN HE?
NO!
hehe,
jk ^_^
Milo D. Cooper
> [...]
> SFA's biggest problem is over-simplification. Before, in ST, combos
> were a complicated feature and if you managed to get one of, you were
> specil. Now, they are so mindless that if you DON'T pull off combos,
> you're a loser. Countering has been oversimplified with ACs. before, it
> actualyl took risks and skill to counter an attack. Now, it only takes a
> block, which is the safest thing to do in the game. Before, the priority
> of moves made it so that only certain moves applied to VERY specific
> situations depending on distance, positioning, and timing. Nowadays, one
> move does it all. Before, it took a LONG time to master a character.
> Now, it takes almost no time at all. SFA is a poor game, but only
> compared to ST. It is still better than 90% of the games out there, I'll
> give it that, but it'll never ever ever come anywhere near of being the
> great game that Super Turbo was.
> J Chensor
How true. Check this out: yesterday at UCSD's Price Club
arcade, there was this Guy player with twelve or so wins. He was
beating everyone (including me) with Guy's b.s. random-attack game,
which, as we all know, reduces matches to turtling and reflexes at
the expense of strategy. After my Adon and Rose lost to this
dude, I finally became exasperated (especially since his little
goon squad expressed constant awe at his "skill"), and resorted to
the same tactic that I use against Wolverine scrubs in X-Men or
Marvel Superheroes: I selected the same character. Though I had
played Guy less than five times since Alpha came out, the "skilled"
player didn't win one round against me. All I did was mimic his
style: high/low confusion, with some of those Cammy-rip-off hooli-
gan roll grabs mixed in, along with a very satisfying match-ending
hurricane kick when he tried to dash in. Alpha is such a joke.
--
**************************************
*___________Milo D. Cooper___________*
* mco...@sonyinteractive.com *
**************************************
Xtropiate
:: for almost all of their normal moves, they just aren't used that often.
:: The priorities of normal moves are TOTALLY screwed up in SFA... moves
:: ALWAYS stop things rather than the very picky positional play of ST. If
:: someone jumps at you with Ryu, his Crouch Fierce ALWAYS stops you. No
:: matter what. Period.
:
:Well, actually, a jumping Ken/Ryu/Akuma that does a short will
:cancel the crouch fierce at the right range... But I see your
:gist. You either miss, or you hit. Whatever happened to double hits?
Double hits are in SFA. Plenty abound.
Kuroyume
: wrote:
[deleted]
: >Yeah, so he has the crouching "safe" strong... so what? What the hell does
: >that mean? Honda has the standing 'porkchop' fierce... take that!
: You'd like to think that, wouldn't you! The fact of the matter is, T-Hawk
: also has a standing fierce: The close double hitting "guh-uh!" fierce!
My point was, so what if T-Hawk has a crouching "safe" strong? Yeah, it's
a nice move, but I don't see how that move will dominate Honda. In fact,
I don't see how T-Hawk dominates Honda anyhow. Alright, we are talking about
ST here, and IMO, a master of any player on that game has a good chance of
defeating another master, but I don't see how T-Hawk beats Honda. You'll
have to give me more than a "safe" strong to prove that.
: Ha ha, you fool!! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders. The
: most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia; and only slightly
: less well known is this: Never go in against T-Hawk, when standing
: fierces are on the line!
Er, I thought you never 1] step on Superman's cape and 2] never spit into the
wind...and 3] never think you can destroy Honda with T-Hawk. ;)
Julien B Beasley
wrote:
>My point was, so what if T-Hawk has a crouching "safe" strong? Yeah, it's
>a nice move, but I don't see how that move will dominate Honda. In fact,
>I don't see how T-Hawk dominates Honda anyhow. Alright, we are talking about
>ST here, and IMO, a master of any player on that game has a good chance of
>defeating another master, but I don't see how T-Hawk beats Honda. You'll
>have to give me more than a "safe" strong to prove that.
I guess my little attempt at humour fell through. Of course Honda crushes
T-Hawk. I was being facetious :). I was trying to think of some of the
most useless moves, like standing fierce and cr. strong. It was all a bad
joke, forgive me Bob. :)
-Julien
PS: I didn't know you played T-Hawk. That's cool, that makes quite a few
T-Hawk players on the net now. I think we are up to 8 or so. Whooo, look
at that popularity surge! :)
Kuroyume
: wrote:
: >My point was, so what if T-Hawk has a crouching "safe" strong? Yeah, it's
: >a nice move, but I don't see how that move will dominate Honda. In fact,
: >I don't see how T-Hawk dominates Honda anyhow. Alright, we are talking about
: >ST here, and IMO, a master of any player on that game has a good chance of
: >defeating another master, but I don't see how T-Hawk beats Honda. You'll
: >have to give me more than a "safe" strong to prove that.
: I guess my little attempt at humour fell through. Of course Honda crushes
: T-Hawk. I was being facetious :). I was trying to think of some of the
: most useless moves, like standing fierce and cr. strong. It was all a bad
: joke, forgive me Bob. :)
: -Julien
Damn, why is everyone so damn sarcastic on this group? But I am serious
when I say that when character 'A' faces character 'B' and both of those
players are 'masters' of their respective characters, no matter how
disadvantaged the fight appears, IMO, the match could go either way. This
is what makes ST so beautiful to me.
BTW, that crouching strong is not that useless, is it? I use it all the
time to buffer into a SPD or a Super SPD.
: PS: I didn't know you played T-Hawk. That's cool, that makes quite a few
: T-Hawk players on the net now. I think we are up to 8 or so. Whooo, look
: at that popularity surge! :)
Hey, I told you this. I'm not a 'master' T-Hawk like you :), but I can hold
my own. Actually I've found other Honda players on the net too. It actually
kind of amazes me. Besides, I'll pick up any character before I play Ryu.
: --
: Stream polished pebbles SF2 Code v1.0: t+ c+ T+ r+(-) f g+
: In the mind's still garden pool m+ s+ v+ M+(-) n+:++ o+
--
Kuroyume
: On Tue, 27 Feb 1996, Milo D. Cooper wrote:
: > Marvel Superheroes: I selected the same character. Though I had
: > played Guy less than five times since Alpha came out, the "skilled"
: > player didn't win one round against me. All I did was mimic his
: > style: high/low confusion, with some of those Cammy-rip-off hooli-
: > gan roll grabs mixed in, along with a very satisfying match-ending
: > hurricane kick when he tried to dash in. Alpha is such a joke.
: I wouldn't go as far as to say SFA is a joke, but yeah, there are some
: badly designed characters (Guy, Sodom, and Rose come to mind) that
: weren't thought out at all. I used to play Guy quite a bit when the game
: first came out, and it just got boring doing the same 'ol high/low game,
: but it worked. Damn, did it feel cheesy winning like that! There's not
: a lot of Guy players here (good?), but my solution was to pick an auto
: character and not worry about the overheads. Gotta say though that
: Akuma's overhead is far worse than anything Guy has. Bullshit range. I
: dislike overheads to begin with, gimme back my throw range!
: -Eric
No. Milo's right here. Go to UCSD, where turtles are bred like rabbits, and
you'll discover what Milo is talking about. Alpha has so many problems, it is
a joke. A big joke.