Super/Super Turbo home versions and CPU difficulty
Shiranui Gen-An
the CPU difficulty on the home versions of Super Turbo. Terry (Takeo
Shimizu) said that Super SFII X in the arcades wasn't as hard as Super SFII
Turbo, and me and a few other people agreed that the home versions of ST
were not as difficult as the US arcade ST. However, I know that the US home
versions of Super are more difficult than any of the home versions of ST
(haven't played the JPN home versions, so I can't comment on them), and
strangely the CPU in those home versions of Super uses patterns that were
used by the CPU in the US arcade ST. I am a bit lost on this one. What is
the deal with the AI between SSFIIX/SSFIIT and the home versions of Super
(both Japan and US)?
Chocobo
I assume that when you say "home versions" you mean the PSX and Saturn versions
of SF Collection. The AI in ST is extremely stupid in both games, and is nothing
like the arcade... this is true in both the US and import versions of the game.
As for the home versions of SSF2 being harder... I haven't noticed it. Are you
sure that's true? Maybe you were just having some bad luck against the computer
or something one day... not to say that you're wrong and that the AI isn't good
in SSF2, I just want to know if you sure. It doesn't make sense to me that the
ST AI would be dumb and it would be good in SSF2 for some reason. I think most
people didn't play SSF2 in the SF Collection much...
Sean Hoyles
This is true. It will let you do increibly stupid things like dizzy
them with repeated fireballs from a distance. If you play for the
purpose of winning, it is no problem to take them down using boneheaded
tactics like this. I liked the fact that the fighters in SSF2 and
SSF2T play more like human opponents, though (weren't human expert
strategies incorporated into the AI for these games?). It beats the
shit out of the extremely patternistic play of the early games like HF
which now catch me offguard and give me trouble. You could use easy
patterns to win against the computer, of course (remember Jab dragon
punch to make Guile instantly flashkick?). But try to play this game
like you would a human being and you would quickly get ruined. Back in
the day of SSF2, I seem to recall some really good Asian players who
could take down almost anyone human but seemed to have a lot more
trouble versus the computer AI. Maybe this has something to do with
it. Hmm.
> As for the home versions of SSF2 being harder... I haven't noticed
it. Are you
> sure that's true? Maybe you were just having some bad luck against
the computer
> or something one day... not to say that you're wrong and that the AI
isn't good
> in SSF2, I just want to know if you sure. It doesn't make sense to me
that the
> ST AI would be dumb and it would be good in SSF2 for some reason. I
think most
> people didn't play SSF2 in the SF Collection much...
If you are used to anything more recent, SSF2 is just too damn slow.
When it first came out, I had not played HF at all so the speed was no
real issue for me. But now, after months of A3 play, the characters in
SSF2 just look like molasses. With no speed setting in SSF2, that
alone is enough to deter me from playing the game. The goddamn awful
load time on SF Collection for PSX is a close second.
--
Sean Hoyles
NF, Canada
My Social Research Web Site:
http://www.mystery.nf.net/fc/social/socialframe.htm
Home Page:
http://www.mystery.nf.net/fc/personal/index.htm
Ancient SFA2 Page:
http://www.mystery.nf.net/fc/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Derek Daniels
Shiranui Gen-An <shiran...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:87qm7e$v0t$1...@nntp4.atl.mindspring.net...
[SNIP]
Home versions are always based on the japanese arcade version. Yes, SSF2X
does have an easier AI (at one time, I owned both arcade versions), but I
have no idea, nor do I care, about SSF2.
BTW, the arcade version of SSF2X has a a turbo4, while ST doesn't.
Derek Daniels
Shiranui Gen-An
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:38A11F7D...@mindspring.com...
> Shiranui Gen-An wrote:
> I assume that when you say "home versions" you mean the PSX and Saturn
versions
> of SF Collection. The AI in ST is extremely stupid in both games, and is
nothing
> like the arcade... this is true in both the US and import versions of the
game.
you
> sure that's true? Maybe you were just having some bad luck against the
computer
> or something one day... not to say that you're wrong and that the AI isn't
good
> in SSF2, I just want to know if you sure. It doesn't make sense to me that
the
> ST AI would be dumb and it would be good in SSF2 for some reason. I think
most
> people didn't play SSF2 in the SF Collection much...
No, I mean the AI on the *SNES and Gen versions* of SSF2 is harder than any
of the home versions of ST, which is strange because the AI in the arcade
SSF2 was a total pushover, and the Saturn (and I assume PS) version emulates
this. I'm just trying to figure out why the AI on the US 16-bit home
versions of Super is harder than the Japanese arcade/32-bit home versions of
Super and ST, and why the 16-bit AI uses patterns that the US arcade ST CPU
used (like Ryu doing rapid shorts into a roundhouse into Hadoken, Ken doing
crossup combos, etc.).
Chocobo
Oh. Was the arcade AI in SSF2 that weak? All I remember for sure was that the AI
in ST was nice and difficult (for AI, anyway). As for your question- when SNES
games were being made, back then Capcom cared about making the games decent.
Ultima
>
> Shiranui Gen-An wrote:
>
[snip]
> > No, I mean the AI on the *SNES and Gen versions* of SSF2 is harder than any of the home versions of ST, which is strange because the AI in the arcade SSF2 was a total pushover, and the Saturn (and I assume PS) version emulates this. I'm just trying to figure out why the AI on the US 16-bit home versions of Super is harder than the Japanese arcade/32-bit home versions of Super and ST, and why the 16-bit AI uses patterns that the US arcade ST CPU used (like Ryu doing rapid shorts into a roundhouse into Hadoken, Ken doing crossup combos, etc.).
> Oh. Was the arcade AI in SSF2 that weak? All I remember for sure was that the AI in ST was nice and difficult (for AI, anyway).
SNES SSF2 AI had NOTHING on the US arcade ST. SSNES AI was only
moderately annoying because the CPU did so much more damage than you (on
level 8) and did the occasional big combo. It still had stupid patterns.
Arcade ST did more damage than you, threw like a barbarian, and in
general had these incredibly difficult patterns. Probably the hardest SF
AI ever (I say that SFA3 AI comes a close second, as that sucker
downright CHEATS; do this day, I still can't stand when the CPU reads my
jab and does a super INSTANTANOUSLY)
>As for your question- when SNES games were being made, back then Capcom cared about making the games decent.
Nah. They were more concerned about rehashing than trying anything
new...
--
Ultima - The Right Arm of Scrub Voltron
http://members.xoom.com/Ultima1 - The Street Fighter RPG Manifesto!
http://members.xoom.com/ShinUltima - U's Ultimate Rambling Page
"How do you "perfect" gameplay? That's like saying music has
been "perfected" over thousands of years. Fun is a matter of
taste." - Jeff Williams 25/10/99
If an arcade doesn't have a version of SF or SS in it, then it's not an
arcade
Jason Fuller
any
> of the home versions of ST, which is strange because the AI in the arcade
> SSF2 was a total pushover, and the Saturn (and I assume PS) version
emulates
> this. I'm just trying to figure out why the AI on the US 16-bit home
> versions of Super is harder than the Japanese arcade/32-bit home versions
of
> Super and ST, and why the 16-bit AI uses patterns that the US arcade ST
CPU
> used (like Ryu doing rapid shorts into a roundhouse into Hadoken, Ken
doing
> crossup combos, etc.).
>
upgrade to the CPU fighters. This was distributed (apparently fairly
limitedly given that it sounds like no one here experienced it) to arcades
to make the computer fights MUCH more difficult, such as Ryu's low
Roundhouse into Hadou-Ken and Zangief's ability to SPD a fighter who missed
a jumping Up attack. CPU damage capabilities were also dramatically
increased; Zangief's SPD took 40-45%, Ryu's standing Fierce into Fierce
Shouryuu-Ken took EXACTLY 50%, and even a simple jump-in Roundhouse/low
Roundhouse combo took 40%+. The SNES and Genesis conversions (and later the
PC conversion, since it is identical to the SNES port) of SSF2 use this
upgrade's overall patterns, apparently minus the afore-mentioned SPD
counter; it never happened to me on these versions, though he's certainly
had opportunities.
By the way, the AI in the PC version of SSF2T is S-O-O-O-O-O pathetic;
it blocks jump-in/cross-ups LOW!!! It's still fun, though.
Jason Fuller
Ethan Hammond
>
> Chocobo wrote:
> >
> > Shiranui Gen-An wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
>
>
> SNES SSF2 AI had NOTHING on the US arcade ST. SSNES AI was only
> moderately annoying because the CPU did so much more damage than you (on
> level 8) and did the occasional big combo. It still had stupid patterns.
> Arcade ST did more damage than you, threw like a barbarian, and in
> general had these incredibly difficult patterns. Probably the hardest SF
> AI ever (I say that SFA3 AI comes a close second, as that sucker
> downright CHEATS; do this day, I still can't stand when the CPU reads my
> jab and does a super INSTANTANOUSLY)
>
> >As for your question- when SNES games were being made, back then Capcom cared about making the games decent.
>
> Nah. They were more concerned about rehashing than trying anything
> new...
But on SSF2 for SNES you could have the 8 man T. Hawk
tournament of shame. Who will prevail? The suspense,
the thrill of victory!
--
All Purpose Cultural Randomness
http://www.angelfire.com/tx/apcr/index.html
Sean Hoyles
Ultima <jas...@rit.edu> wrote:
> Chocobo wrote:
> >
> > Shiranui Gen-An wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
> > > No, I mean the AI on the *SNES and Gen versions* of SSF2 is
harder than any of the home versions of ST, which is strange because
assume PS) version emulates this. I'm just trying to figure out why
the AI on the US 16-bit home versions of Super is harder than the
Japanese arcade/32-bit home versions of Super and ST, and why the 16-
bit AI uses patterns that the US arcade ST CPU used (like Ryu doing
rapid shorts into a roundhouse into Hadoken, Ken doing crossup combos,
etc.).
>
was that the AI in ST was nice and difficult (for AI, anyway).
>
> SNES SSF2 AI had NOTHING on the US arcade ST. SSNES AI was only
> moderately annoying because the CPU did so much more damage than you
(on
> level 8) and did the occasional big combo. It still had stupid
patterns.
> Arcade ST did more damage than you, threw like a barbarian, and in
> general had these incredibly difficult patterns. Probably the hardest
SF
> AI ever (I say that SFA3 AI comes a close second, as that sucker
> downright CHEATS;
I think that the SNES Hyper-Fighting game was a bastard too. Champion
Edition was fairly easy. But the stuff that the computer sometimes
pulled in HF was ass. Besides reading your movies with instant perfect
reaction and counter, there were other things like:
- throwing (even back then certain characters were doing it regularly;
particularly after your attacking jab which the AI interpreted as a
tick and instantly flicked your ass in retaliation).
- cheating (Guile throwing a sonic boom and instantly flash kicking
you as you jumped it)
- using bastard patterns and combos. Example: Blanka's vertical ball
into: rolling ball, vertical ball, electricity, and so on. He would
even cross up with the damn thing on occasion. If you were using a
shoto, the dragon punch helped stop this pattern somewhat (still
moderately difficult, though). But for characters like Zangief,
getting in on that ball pattern could be super difficult.
In fact, I think of all the SF games (and I have played them all at one
time or another), the HF version was the one that took me the longest
to finish without continuing. Later games have been somewhat easier
for me. The higher reliance on AI patterns in the early games accounts
for this, I believe. Even though SFA3 is hard on maximum AI, I find I
still have a lot more flexibility regarding what I can and cannot do in
that game compared to others like HF. Playing the early game AI now,
the patterned play is highly prevalent and, to a certain degree,
annoying. But back in the early days, you didn't have as advanced an
AI as we have today, so it never bothered you as much. These days,
with a different standard, you cannot help but notice it and be a
little annoyed by it.
do this day, I still can't stand when the CPU reads my
> jab and does a super INSTANTANOUSLY)
Memories of Ken's instant reaction Shoryreppa. And Gen's drive by.
; - )
>
> >As for your question- when SNES games were being made, back then
Capcom cared about making the games decent.
Here's another point. As their arcade games become more and more
advanced, Capcom conversions have become neurotically focused on
fitting "more matches into a smaller box". Rather than admit that a
game such as XMENvs.SF can't be faithfully reproduced on PSX, they go
ahead and make a substandard game, usually compensating for the poor
translation by including "tricks" which actually ruin the game even
further. Whether the motivation for this is money is not my place to
say but it seems highly probable. I still can't believe they fit SFA2
onto a SNES cart - or even bothered to, for that matter.
Don't get me wrong. The Capcom programmers are very good at crunching
data down so that it all fits onto a CD or cart and works as
efficiently as possible. I just think that they should use sounder
judgment when assessing whether a game can be adequately reproduced,
given the limitations of their specs.
As a coarse analogy, you can take a piece of shit, clean it, pretty it
up, and even dress it up in a three-piece suit if you want to. But, at
the end of the day, what you still have is a piece of shit.
I think Capcom needs to gain better foresight into which of their games
are likely to be "fecal" on home versions before they ever begin
developing them for the home systems.
poc...@my-deja.com
Ultima <jas...@rit.edu> wrote:
> Chocobo wrote:
> >
> > Shiranui Gen-An wrote:
> >
> [snip]
>
> > > No, I mean the AI on the *SNES and Gen versions* of SSF2 is harder
than any of the home versions of ST, which is strange because the AI in
the arcade SSF2 was a total pushover, and the Saturn (and I assume PS)
version emulates this. I'm just trying to figure out why the AI on the
US 16-bit home versions of Super is harder than the Japanese
patterns that the US arcade ST CPU used (like Ryu doing rapid shorts
into a roundhouse into Hadoken, Ken doing crossup combos, etc.).
>
> > Oh. Was the arcade AI in SSF2 that weak? All I remember for sure was
that the AI in ST was nice and difficult (for AI, anyway).
>
> SNES SSF2 AI had NOTHING on the US arcade ST. SSNES AI was only
> moderately annoying because the CPU did so much more damage than you
(on
> level 8) and did the occasional big combo. It still had stupid
patterns.
> Arcade ST did more damage than you, threw like a barbarian, and in
> general had these incredibly difficult patterns. Probably the hardest
SF
> AI ever (I say that SFA3 AI comes a close second, as that sucker
my
> jab and does a super INSTANTANOUSLY)
K...Now(heheh, I'm bored), that sounds gay. You STILL can't stand it?
WTF? Dude, you obviously know it does that. Here, lemme lay out a3's
ai....
Since we're talking about Ken(of course we are), we know we can just
throw out a short to draw him to do a super. So, we know when we can
beat the shiet outta him for FREE. Moving along...
Gief jumps if you hit a low move. So, you know when to whoop his A**.
Guy runs into you all day=Free Game. Sakura. Block, she will
eventually spin kick. Block and reverse...so, you know when to kick
that bi*** in the c***.
Sodom...always jumps at the beginning of the round...
Ken and birdie AND blanka die to just fireballs
Akuma WILL throw a fireball and get RAPED FOR FREE
Bison yells and says "HEY! I'M GONNA THROW A FIREBALL NOW< JUMP AND LAND
YOUR BEST!" c'mon? He also says clearly "Here comes my super" YOU
KNOW THIS.
Sagat gets tripped at the beginning and never blocks subsequently...free
game...Vega always slides too close...dhalsim doesn't block...etc
etc...at it's hardest setting a3 is a cakewalk...not that ST wasn't
just...
On ST at least the ai "acted" like a player, however, you couldn't act
as though the cpu was a player due to instant counters(geif rhs sim
st.forward FOR FREE:) But the patterns are rather simplistic also.
Apoc.
Chocobo
> > >As for your question- when SNES games were being made, back then
> Capcom cared about making the games decent.
>
> Here's another point. As their arcade games become more and more
> advanced, Capcom conversions have become neurotically focused on
> fitting "more matches into a smaller box". Rather than admit that a
> game such as XMENvs.SF can't be faithfully reproduced on PSX,
Why should they do that? None of the SF2 games could be faithfully
reproduced on SNES or Genesis, yet Capcom went ahead and made the games
(which made a lot of people happy, and made Capcom a pile of money).
> they go
> ahead and make a substandard game, usually compensating for the poor
> translation by including "tricks" which actually ruin the game even
> further. Whether the motivation for this is money is not my place to
> say but it seems highly probable.
What's wrong with that? And anyway, when you turn off the supercancelling
and other mess, XSF is still one of their most accurate home conversions to
date.
> I still can't believe they fit SFA2
> onto a SNES cart - or even bothered to, for that matter.
I have no idea why they bothered with that when the SNES was already dead
as far as new game sales.
> Don't get me wrong. The Capcom programmers are very good at crunching
> data down so that it all fits onto a CD or cart and works as
> efficiently as possible. I just think that they should use sounder
> judgment when assessing whether a game can be adequately reproduced,
> given the limitations of their specs.
They're in it solely for the money. If they think a game will sell, they'll
make it. Do you think they should have said, "hmm... this Dreamcast version
of MVC just isn't working. The sound is off, it moves faster than the
arcade... it's just not an accurate translation. We shouldn't bother
releasing this." If they thought only about releasing near-perfect
conversions, there would be two Saturn conversions and that's it.
Chocobo
> Maybe I should have clarified here. I didn't mean for all games.
> Little cosmetic things like missing animation frames are not a big deal
> to me. But when they leave out something like the tag team option in a
> VS game (for all practical purposes), I think it may be stretching it a
> bit too far over the mark. It's good for practicing the combos and
> stuff, I guess, but the strategy revolving around tag teaming is
> completely lost. I actually own the XMvsSF for PSX. I bought it second
> hand at a time when there was very little new SF available. I have
> never played it a lot given that I don't like the game much anyway. But
> from what I can see, here is a game with a major flaw in it from the get
> go which severely hampers some of the originality of the arcade game.
> The tag team option in it is exceptionally limited. Then, to
> compensate, they stuff in "flashy" gimmicks like super cancelling which
> isn't even equally beneficial to all characters in the game. Maybe I
> just got infinitely royal flushed to death once too often and it turned
> me off from the whole thing.
You just need to turn on the limited tag team mode and turn off the stupid
supercancelling. The default game with all the new crap in it is nothing
like the arcade and it's just stupid.
Sean Hoyles
Maybe I should have clarified here. I didn't mean for all games.
Little cosmetic things like missing animation frames are not a big deal
to me. But when they leave out something like the tag team option in a
VS game (for all practical purposes), I think it may be stretching it a
bit too far over the mark. It's good for practicing the combos and
stuff, I guess, but the strategy revolving around tag teaming is
completely lost. I actually own the XMvsSF for PSX. I bought it second
hand at a time when there was very little new SF available. I have
never played it a lot given that I don't like the game much anyway. But
from what I can see, here is a game with a major flaw in it from the get
go which severely hampers some of the originality of the arcade game.
The tag team option in it is exceptionally limited. Then, to
compensate, they stuff in "flashy" gimmicks like super cancelling which
isn't even equally beneficial to all characters in the game. Maybe I
just got infinitely royal flushed to death once too often and it turned
me off from the whole thing.
To a certain extent, I see your point too. If your from the "something
is better than nothing" school, the lower quality home translations are
justified. But games like SFA2 for SNES just seem like a bad idea from
the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to Atari
or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name changes to
the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game). While I
have never actually seen them, MSH and XM:COTA on PSX supposedly suffer
too from issues such as slowdown and animation problems - to the point
where even combo placement is thrown out of whack because of them in
some matches (can anyone verify this? Or am I talking out of my ass
here?).
But yes, even if the SNES versions of SF2 were not arcade perfect, they
still ran pretty smoothly in terms of gameplay. And, undoubtedly, I
thank Capcom for putting them out as they really served as the basis for
my early SF training. But some of the later games have not been as
faithful to their arcade predecessors. This is simply because the
latest games are just so much bigger and are very difficult to run on
harware with limited specs. It is not necessarily that I consider
Capcom evil for putting these games out. But I sometimes wonder if all
the effort they put into cramming everything in is adequately reflected
in the final product. Although Capcom put a lot of work into games like
XMvsSF and kept a good deal of it intact, it doesn't change the fact
that the tag team feature is largely disabled and a major part of the
game removed with it. Thus, as good a translation as the game is
otherwise (and, from previous posts, I get the impression that you think
this is a good translation, even better than SFA3), it is still at its
base a flawed game.
Anyhow, my love for the VS series is limited anyway, so my opinion may
already be somewhat biased here. To each his own, I guess. If people
are happy with less than perfect translations of their favorite games
and Capcom is willing to spend the time and money to invest in their
development, who am I to quibble on such matters?
--
Sean Hoyles
NF, Canada
My Social Research Web Site:
http://www.mystery.nf.net/fc/social/socialframe.htm
Home Page:
http://www.mystery.nf.net/fc/personal/index.htm
Ancient SFA2 Page:
http://www.mystery.nf.net/fc/
Ultima
[Re: Arcade ST] Probably the hardest SF AI ever (I say that SFA3 AI
comes a close second, as that sucker downright CHEATS; do this day, I
still can't stand when the CPU reads my jab and does a super
INSTANTANOUSLY)
>
> K...Now(heheh, I'm bored), that sounds gay. You STILL can't stand it?
> WTF? Dude, you obviously know it does that.
Yes, I know. It's still annoying. Just because I'm used to it doesn't
mean I have to like it Apoc (kind of like a dull throbbing pain) :p
> Here, lemme lay out a3's ai....
> Since we're talking about Ken(of course we are), we know we can just
> throw out a short to draw him to do a super. So, we know when we can
> beat the shiet outta him for FREE. Moving along...
It's not just Ken, and it's not just the super. Stick out random jabs
and shorts from across the screen and see what the CPU does. They
usually will counter (even though they don't hit) with something.
Sakura, for example, does standing fierce every time I do standing jab.
From the entire screen away, this is nothing. When I stick out a jab at
close range (for whatever reason - blocked combo, pressure, etc). and
she does instant s.fierce and it stuffs mine, THEN it gets annoying.
> Gief jumps if you hit a low move. So, you know when to whoop his A**.
Actually, I notice he jumps more reliably if you do s.jab from half to
2/3rds screen away. He'll do it close too, but unless you have a
reasonably invincible anti-air, you don't want him jumping from that
close.. :p
The difficulty of Zangief depends on who I'm playing, actually. Certain
characters like Birdie, Sodom and especially Mika I find difficult to
win with consistently against CPU Z. V-Mika can't win without meter,
which means get to hit him with my custom once, and then run away and
hope to charge up before he can kill me with his high priority moves and
grabs (NOte: I think MIka's ass-splash VC is air-blockable unless she
has 100% meter, which is why I can only pull the VC off at the beginning
of roun 1; Z never lets me charge to to 100% again, and at anything
less, Z just air-blocks my VC and SPD/Double German Suplexes me when I
land).
> Guy runs into you all day=Free Game. Sakura. Block, she will
> eventually spin kick. Block and reverse...so, you know when to kick
> that bi*** in the c***.
Yup and yup. CPU Sakura only becomes a chore if you actually *attack*
her. Her HK takes out almost everything.. >:(
> Sodom...always jumps at the beginning of the round...
> Ken and birdie AND blanka die to just fireballs
NOthing special here
> Akuma WILL throw a fireball and get RAPED FOR FREE
Akuma's an interesting case here: Where the A3 machine is, there's this
constant glare from the ceiling lights. A-Akuma's normal dark colour
(punch colour) combined with his dark stage makes him almost invisible
here. I basically have to guess what he's doing at any time. Akuma's
usually not hard, but occasionally he goes into rampaage mode and starts
doing nonsense like after a knock down, do a whiffed low short from a
step or two away -> throw when you get up (something he did in A2
occasionally, and even I though I know what he's going to do, I STILL
can't avoid it). He ususally does that about once per game. The other
thing he likes to do (in A or X-ism) is short teleport behind after I
stick out a move and Raging Demon me. He does that about once per game,
as well... >:(
> Bison yells and says "HEY! I'M GONNA THROW A FIREBALL NOW< JUMP AND LAND YOUR BEST!" c'mon? He also says clearly "Here comes my super" YOU KNOW THIS.
I find Shin BIson to be one of the easier opponents, actually. He's just
A2 Bison with a bigass super. Strategy for him is simple: As long as
he's charged, don't jump. Wait until he does his super, then annihilate
his ass.
> Sagat gets tripped at the beginning and never blocks subsequently...free game...Vega always slides too close...dhalsim doesn't block...etc etc...at it's hardest setting a3 is a cakewalk...
I disagree. SOME characters are a cakewalk. Some characters are just
incredibly annoying. The ones I find to be really annoying are Zangief
(already mentioned above), Cammy (Canon SPikes everything, grabs you off
the ground repeatedly wth hooligan grab), Cody (does a ton of damage and
throws like there's no tomorrow), Charlie (high-priority moves galore
and also throws like no tomorrow), and Chun Li (like Charlie, but a LOT
worse; she's such a bullshit character). Depending on the time of day
and the phase of the moon, A/X Adon, A-Akuma, A-Gen, and Mika tend to
play rathering annoyingly as well.
This isn't to say I lose to the CPU a lot. I don't. But the CPU
definitely can be a pain in the ass to deal with sometimes...
> not that ST wasn't just... On ST at least the ai "acted" like a player, however, you couldn't act as though the cpu was a player due to instant counters(geif rhs sim st.forward FOR FREE:) But the patterns are rather simplistic also.
Yeah. But with the extreme damage, you had a lot less margin for error.
Cammy hits me with a standing fierce and two jumping forwards, and I've
lost 60% of my energy..? Yeesh... -_-
tortoise
<sho...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> But games like SFA2 for SNES just seem like a bad idea from
>the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to
Atari
>or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name
changes to
>the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game).
I believe he's called Kitana because he was called Kitana in the
SNES versions of Final Fight. Why they did that in FF to begin
with is beyond me.
And on the topic of AI, I just love it when the cpu in A3 grabs
you and chomps/chokes/noogies you at hyper speed and takes off
like 30% of your life. Trying to break out of it seems pretty
pointless too.
--
--
Matt
mgreer[at]artic.edu
Coleman Ford owes me $50
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
Chocobo
> In article <87vvbd$di9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Sean Hoyles
> <sho...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > But games like SFA2 for SNES just seem like a bad idea from
> >the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to
> Atari
> >or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name
> changes to
> >the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game).
>
> I believe he's called Kitana because he was called Kitana in the
> SNES versions of Final Fight. Why they did that in FF to begin
> with is beyond me.
"Sodom" has negative connotations to it, and back when Final Fight came out
Nintendo censored anything that could possibly be offensive to anyone at all.
When A2 came out, they weren't doing that anymore, but for consistency (I guess)
they kept the FF name.
> And on the topic of AI, I just love it when the cpu in A3 grabs
> you and chomps/chokes/noogies you at hyper speed and takes off
> like 30% of your life. Trying to break out of it seems pretty
> pointless too.
I've seen 80% from Guy's kick throw. One more retarded thing about A3.
Sean Hoyles
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> tortoise wrote:
>
> > In article <87vvbd$di9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Sean Hoyles
> > <sho...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> >
> > >the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to
> > Atari
> > >or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name
> > changes to
> > >the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game).
> >
> > SNES versions of Final Fight. Why they did that in FF to begin
> > with is beyond me.
>
> "Sodom" has negative connotations to it, and back when Final Fight
came out
> Nintendo censored anything that could possibly be offensive to anyone
at all.
> When A2 came out, they weren't doing that anymore, but for
consistency (I guess)
> they kept the FF name.
>
> > And on the topic of AI, I just love it when the cpu in A3 grabs
> > you and chomps/chokes/noogies you at hyper speed and takes off
> > like 30% of your life. Trying to break out of it seems pretty
> > pointless too.
>
> I've seen 80% from Guy's kick throw. One more retarded thing about A3.
>
The worst is getting pummeled by A-Guy's knee bash repeatedly, breaking
out of it, only to be Air Supered as you fall back. Now that's unfair.
He doesn't do it every time but I have seen it happen on occasion.
Mark Zedaker
<mgreerN...@artic.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article <87vvbd$di9$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Sean Hoyles
> <sho...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
> > But games like SFA2 for SNES just seem like a bad idea from
> >the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to
> Atari
> >or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name
> changes to
> >the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game).
>
> I believe he's called Kitana because he was called Kitana in the
> SNES versions of Final Fight. Why they did that in FF to begin
> with is beyond me.
It was 'Katana' (aargh!), and in both cases, it was changed because
of Nintendo's policy about 'decency'.
--
Mark Zedaker
ch...@home.com
Ethan Hammond
> > >the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to
> > Atari
> > >or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name
> > changes to
> > >the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game).
> >
> > SNES versions of Final Fight. Why they did that in FF to begin
> > with is beyond me.
Wait Kitana was the ninja girl with the fans in
MK2. I remember Sodom was called Katana in Final
Fight. I never played Alpha 2 on the SNES, but
I would assume they changed it to Katana to be
like Final Fight for some unknown reason.
Jon Allegrezza
Ethan Hammond wrote:
>
> > > > But games like SFA2 for SNES just seem like a bad idea from
> > > >the start (in fact, didn't Capcom eventually give the license to
> > > Atari
> > > >or something to finish the game?; which is why Sodom's name
> > > changes to
> > > >the more child-friendly "Kitana" in that version of the game).
The US version's distribution rights were bought by Nintendo
themselves. Apparently Capcom US didn't want to be saddlebagged with
the large risk/little reward that was SNES SFA2. Wow, Capcom US did
something RIGHT for a change.
Once Nintendo got their little censoring hands on it, they made their
little "changes" in their never-ending goal to protect us from ourselves
(they also changed Zangief's ending...instead of "we're sending you a
bottle of our finest vodka"..vodka got changed to caviar)
The "Sodom to Katana" change was to keep things consistant with their
earlier act of censorship (which was, of course, having Sodom renamed
Katana in the SNES Final Fight...having sodomy in word alone just isn't
right by Nintendo's standards).
--
Jon Allegrezza - Jon's Hunk of Web 2 Dash
www.tiac.net/users/heyimjon
VG Fan Art & Online Portfolio
"In my world I like to see the glasses as half-full...OF SCOTCH!" -
Craig Kilborn, freak
Keep the Lick-Me Spamboy in E-Mail to respond (filters out both unwanted
pyramid schemes AND the sarcastically challenged)