SFZ3 home versions
Shiranui Gen-An
match the arcade version's gameplay, in particular the PS version. I have
both that one and the DC version. I want to know what is so different. I
haven't noticed anything different in my playing but I'm not at the expert
level where the differences would stand out. Also, how does the Saturn
version compare to the others and the arcade in terms of gameplay?
Captain Spandex
secrets open, and the exact names of the places in World Tour mode (I.e. the
name of the park in which you fight Dan). Also, you can choose the stage you're
in in vs. mode, I believe. And the Dramatic mode lets you play 2 human vs. 1
human w/ a multitap.
- - - --=Captain Spandex=-- - - -
"I'm not gay! I'm big-boned! Oh, wait..."
"It is a mistake to believe that any major
problem can be solved with just a potato."
-Douglas Adams
Tempora
Captain Spandex <gle...@aol.communist> wrote in message
news:19991102162824...@ng-fr1.aol.com...
> The Saturn version of SFZ3 is like the PSx version w/ shorter loads, all
> secrets open, and the exact names of the places in World Tour mode (I.e.
the
> name of the park in which you fight Dan). Also, you can choose the stage
you're
> in in vs. mode, I believe. And the Dramatic mode lets you play 2 human vs.
1
> human w/ a multitap.
> - - - --=Captain Spandex=-- - - -
You mean the exact name of the places you fight in the Arcade mode, although
in Japanese of course.
The Saturn is similiar to the PSX version in the gameplay, but otherwise,
it's totally different
(i.e. Saturn version does not use the sprites from the PSX version; sprites
are bigger and much more vivid in the Saturn version).
Shiranui Gen-An
Tempora <temp...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7vnqp9$d7s$1...@nntp3.atl.mindspring.net...
No, no, I know all of the cosmetic differences. I'm saying that posts on
this NG said that there were some serious gameplay differences between the
home versions and the arcade version. I'd like to know what they are.
V-ISM seems to be central to that argument.
Cammy White
<shiran...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> No, no, I know all of the cosmetic differences. I'm saying that
> posts on
> this NG said that there were some serious gameplay differences
> between the
> home versions and the arcade version. I'd like to know what they
> are.
> V-ISM seems to be central to that argument.
Yes, there are quite a few differences...
#1, Dhalsim has been toned down considerably. I don't think he can
short slide -> yoga fire anymore for one, and he can't combo/cancel a
lot of stuff he used to be able to.
#2, hit detection is slightly different. It's still funky as heck, but
it's different.
There are other differences, but I can't remember offhand what they
are. :(
--Cammy, the V-ism playing Scrub
* Sent from RemarQ http://www.remarq.com The Internet's Discussion Network *
The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!
pachi
Saturn version is more exact like the arcade...big,wide character...2 sec
loading...what you been smoking
Captain Spandex <gle...@aol.communist> wrote in message
news:19991102162824...@ng-fr1.aol.com...
> The Saturn version of SFZ3 is like the PSx version w/ shorter loads, all
> secrets open, and the exact names of the places in World Tour mode (I.e.
the
> name of the park in which you fight Dan). Also, you can choose the stage
you're
> in in vs. mode, I believe. And the Dramatic mode lets you play 2 human vs.
1
> human w/ a multitap.
> - - - --=Captain Spandex=-- - - -
>
>
MCTek
Saturn version is a prettier version of PSX alpha 3, WITH SLOWDOWNS. Let's
not forget both home versions is garbage since the hit detection is even
MORE messed up than the arcade. I think the only difference between the
Saturn and PSX is that Dhalsim is even weaker now. Once again, both
versions are crap. Yes I get to say that cause I have both. Of course, i'd
still rather play the PSX version since I can actually do super and VCs
without the game lagging out on me. Better yet, go play Hyper Fighting on
Callus, now THAT'S a good port.
pachi <pa...@mediaone.net> wrote in message
news:nZ6Z3.19759$bh.2...@news2.pompano.net...
pnt
The only time I saw any was during custom combos when there were lots
of fb's on the screen...i didnt see any during normal gameplay..
I personally am looking for something like saturn sT's slowdown.
but maybe i just suck and can't recognize slowdown when I see it.
BTW i found the saturn version to be closer to the arcade than psx, in
terms of the properties of moves (i.e. harder to "pass right through",
some moves such as jumping roundhouse dont' have insane priority like
on psx, the actual properties of v combos such as invulnerability and
the way the shadows work <-- psx threw customs out the window and made
up some crap that is supposed to pass for it). Also the graphics are
better and loading time is lower. Sound suffered (of course).
MCTek <jump...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:813l1c$ku5$1...@nntp8.atl.mindspring.net...
: choc, you wanna take this one? ^_^
: >
: >
:
:
Chocobo
pachi wrote:
> thats bullshit...the Saturn version its not like the PSX version...the
> Saturn version is more exact like the arcade...big,wide character...2 sec
> loading...what you been smoking
First of all... if someone has a different viewpoint than yours, why do people
always ask if the person is smoking something? It was funny for a little while,
but it's really old now, especially now that people say it for any reason.
pachi: as MCTek said in another post, the Saturn version is a lot like the PSX
version. It's just about the same game, with a few more animation frames, less
loading, some slowdown... and the gameplay is almost exactly the same (meaning,
it's nothing like the arcade version). It's funny how you defend the Saturn
version with "big characters" "fast loading"... does ANYONE care about the
freaking gameplay anymore?
Makka 5000
I like slowdowns in certain places. It adds drama to the game.
Did u notice that Fei Long is missing one of his supers in the saturn port?
Where he jump kicks the dude hella far.
> in in vs. mode, I believe. And the Dramatic mode lets you play 2 human
>vs.
>> 1 human
I think that is b.s. because i tried hooking up my mulitap in dramatic mode and
it didn't detect any 3rd player....
Spider-Dan
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> pachi: as MCTek said in another post, the Saturn version is a lot like
> the PSX version. It's just about the same game, with a few more
> animation frames, less loading, some slowdown... and the gameplay is
> almost exactly the same (meaning, it's nothing like the arcade
> version). It's funny how you defend the Saturn
> version with "big characters" "fast loading"... does ANYONE care about
> the freaking gameplay anymore?
In his Alpha 3 systems FAQ, James Chen says that the Saturn version of
Alpha 3 is "almost 100% perfect." The only difference he mentions is
the invincibility window on VCs. (And yes, he does note that the PSX
and DC versions are not arcade perfect. He also specifically states
that the Saturn version is definitely closer to the arcade than both the
PSX and DC versions.) I think James Chen "cares about freaking
gameplay," and I also think he knows what he's talking about (at least,
MUCH more so than anyone posting in this thread, myself included). So
please stop whining about how there are no good Alpha 3 ports and go
back to saying "PSX XSF has 100% arcade perfect gameplay." Even PSX A3
is about a jillion times better of a conversion than any PSX Marvel
game.
--
"If all the human race is worthy of being obliterated then that
shows that God is very kind in letting some live when they don't
deserve it." - Sam Lopez
Dan Thompson
[send e-mail to] edge [at] chipware [dot] net
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Captain Spandex
>version with "big characters" "fast loading"... does ANYONE care about the
>freaking gameplay anymore?
nope. : ) Sorry, I was working on hearsay about the dramatic mode 3 players and
all that. ; )
MasSnead2
>>version with "big characters" "fast loading"... does ANYONE care about the
>>freaking gameplay anymore?
>
Of course not, who do you think so many people have PSX's.
They love them 30 fps, wanna be 3D, crap shows.
I missed the original message, so I'm sorry if it says quotes by the wrong
person.
Chocobo
> In article <38358DFF...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > pachi: as MCTek said in another post, the Saturn version is a lot like
> > the PSX version. It's just about the same game, with a few more
> > animation frames, less loading, some slowdown... and the gameplay is
> > almost exactly the same (meaning, it's nothing like the arcade
> > version). It's funny how you defend the Saturn
> > version with "big characters" "fast loading"... does ANYONE care about
> > the freaking gameplay anymore?
>
> In his Alpha 3 systems FAQ, James Chen says that the Saturn version of
> Alpha 3 is "almost 100% perfect." The only difference he mentions is
> the invincibility window on VCs. (And yes, he does note that the PSX
> and DC versions are not arcade perfect. He also specifically states
> that the Saturn version is definitely closer to the arcade than both the
> PSX and DC versions.)
I didn't say the PSX and other versions are exactly the same, I said they're
a lot alike. Meaning that you can't expect something you learn on the home
system to work in the arcade. Both have the different corner properties from
the arcade, both have the :new and improved" Dhalsim, etc.
> I think James Chen "cares about freaking
> gameplay," and I also think he knows what he's talking about (at least,
> MUCH more so than anyone posting in this thread, myself included).
I never said that he didn't... you act like I insulted him directly.
> So
> please stop whining about how there are no good Alpha 3 ports and go
> back to saying "PSX XSF has 100% arcade perfect gameplay." Even PSX A3
> is about a jillion times better of a conversion than any PSX Marvel
> game.
I never whined about how there are no good A3 ports... even a perfect port
would suck, Alpha 3 is hugely flawed no matter which way you look at it. And
if you think A3's hundreds of changes compares to XSF's perfect gameplay
conversion, that's just incorrect.
Chocobo
> I don't think anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
> dissapointed with the home conversions.
>
> "boo hoo, I can't cheap with Dhalsim, boo hoo." Give me a break...
That's because anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
foolish, and they like crap. So of course they'd be pleased with even
worse crap on the home conversions.
TS
dissapointed with the home conversions.
"boo hoo, I can't cheap with Dhalsim, boo hoo." Give me a break...
--END TRANSMISSION--
TS
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> TS wrote:
>
> > I don't think anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
> > dissapointed with the home conversions.
> >
> > "boo hoo, I can't cheap with Dhalsim, boo hoo." Give me a break...
>
> foolish, and they like crap. So of course they'd be pleased with even
> worse crap on the home conversions.
>
Regardless of what you think of A3 and it's players, my point was that
if you like the arcade version, you're not going to vomit in horror
once you see the home versions. Likewise, if you don't like A3, then
you really shouldn't expect a different game when you by the home
version of it.
Kurokko
>foolish, and they like crap. So of course they'd be pleased with even
>worse crap on the home conversions.
yeah everyone should be playing SSF2Turbo cause it's the greatest game ever
.... Bahhahahahahahahahahahahaha
Chocobo
> In article <38374ABD...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> > TS wrote:
> >
> > > I don't think anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
> > > dissapointed with the home conversions.
> > >
> > > "boo hoo, I can't cheap with Dhalsim, boo hoo." Give me a break...
> >
> > That's because anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
> > foolish, and they like crap. So of course they'd be pleased with even
> > worse crap on the home conversions.
> >
>
> Regardless of what you think of A3 and it's players, my point was that
> if you like the arcade version, you're not going to vomit in horror
> once you see the home versions. Likewise, if you don't like A3, then
> you really shouldn't expect a different game when you by the home
> version of it.
Well, you might not expect a different game when you buy the home version,
but you are getting one... I see your point though. People that love it
won't care much, people that hate it will still hate it. But people like me
who didn't like it a lot but enjoyed it a little bit, they'll be
disappointed since it's not like the arcade.
pnt
version.
vism is all screwed up, priorities and speeds are wacked, etc.
TS <ts...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8180qa$jnt$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
: In article <38374ABD...@mindspring.com>,
: Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
: > TS wrote:
: >
: > > I don't think anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
: > > dissapointed with the home conversions.
: > >
: > > "boo hoo, I can't cheap with Dhalsim, boo hoo." Give me a break...
: >
: > That's because anyone who genuinely liked the arcade version of A3 is
: > foolish, and they like crap. So of course they'd be pleased with even
: > worse crap on the home conversions.
: >
:
: Regardless of what you think of A3 and it's players, my point was that
: if you like the arcade version, you're not going to vomit in horror
: once you see the home versions. Likewise, if you don't like A3, then
: you really shouldn't expect a different game when you by the home
: version of it.
:
: --END TRANSMISSION--
Spider-Dan
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> > In his Alpha 3 systems FAQ, James Chen says that the Saturn version
> > of Alpha 3 is "almost 100% perfect." The only difference he
> > mentions is the invincibility window on VCs. (And yes, he does note
> > that the PSX and DC versions are not arcade perfect. He also
> > specifically states that the Saturn version is definitely closer to
> > the arcade than both the PSX and DC versions.)
>
> I didn't say the PSX and other versions are exactly the same, I said
> they're a lot alike. Meaning that you can't expect something you learn
> on the home system to work in the arcade. Both have the different
> corner properties from the arcade, both have the :new and improved"
> Dhalsim, etc.
So, Chocobo, exactly how many times have you played Saturn A3?
> > So
> > please stop whining about how there are no good Alpha 3 ports and go
> > back to saying "PSX XSF has 100% arcade perfect gameplay." Even PSX
> > A3 is about a jillion times better of a conversion than any PSX
> > Marvel game.
>
> I never whined about how there are no good A3 ports... even a perfect
> port would suck, Alpha 3 is hugely flawed no matter which way you look
> at it. And if you think A3's hundreds of changes compares to XSF's
> perfect gameplay conversion, that's just incorrect.
Bzzt. Wrong. Your twisted perspective has blinded you. What you mean
to say is, XSF's gameplay is perfect when you're playing in Training.
In other words, you seem to be unable to differentiate a near-perfect
translation of the combo engine from a perfect gameplay conversion. As
I've explained to you many times, the arcade is one round and you pick
two characters. There are many matchups in the arcade where
strategically you want to pick two characters to counter your opponent's
character choice(s). (Please, do not lengthen this thread
unneccessarily by trying to say that being able to mirror match makes
PSX XSF a perfect gameplay conversion.) I can't believe that anyone
posting to this newsgroup as long as you could dismiss a *fundamental*
aspect of fighting games, simply because you don't like playing the
arcade competitively.
In any case, your repeated statements about perfect gameplay conversion
are out and out wrong. If the best definition you can give of
"gameplay" is "Training mode combos" then maybe that's why you see PSX
XSF through such a warped looking-glass. I don't see how you can
possibly say XSF is a great conversion then trash MSF. They're both the
same in Training.
--
"If all the human race is worthy of being obliterated then that
shows that God is very kind in letting some live when they don't
deserve it." - Sam Lopez
Dan Thompson
[send e-mail to] edge [at] chipware [dot] net
Chocobo
> In article <3836CA1D...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > Spider-Dan wrote:
> >
> > > In his Alpha 3 systems FAQ, James Chen says that the Saturn version
> > > of Alpha 3 is "almost 100% perfect." The only difference he
> > > mentions is the invincibility window on VCs. (And yes, he does note
> > > that the PSX and DC versions are not arcade perfect. He also
> > > specifically states that the Saturn version is definitely closer to
> > > the arcade than both the PSX and DC versions.)
> >
> > I didn't say the PSX and other versions are exactly the same, I said
> > they're a lot alike. Meaning that you can't expect something you learn
> > on the home system to work in the arcade. Both have the different
> > corner properties from the arcade, both have the :new and improved"
> > Dhalsim, etc.
>
> So, Chocobo, exactly how many times have you played Saturn A3?
Less than you have, I'm sure. So is your point that you've played it more,
so you must be right? Well, I've played PSX A3 and XSF more. Who cares. The
Saturn version does have those differences, regardless of how many times
I've played it.
>
> > > So
> > > please stop whining about how there are no good Alpha 3 ports and go
> > > back to saying "PSX XSF has 100% arcade perfect gameplay." Even PSX
> > > A3 is about a jillion times better of a conversion than any PSX
> > > Marvel game.
> >
> > I never whined about how there are no good A3 ports... even a perfect
> > port would suck, Alpha 3 is hugely flawed no matter which way you look
> > at it. And if you think A3's hundreds of changes compares to XSF's
> > perfect gameplay conversion, that's just incorrect.
>
> Bzzt. Wrong. Your twisted perspective has blinded you. What you mean
> to say is, XSF's gameplay is perfect when you're playing in Training.
> In other words, you seem to be unable to differentiate a near-perfect
> translation of the combo engine from a perfect gameplay conversion.
Clearly, we have different definitions of what's "gameplay" and what's
extra. The same combos work, the same moves work the same way as the arcade,
the same tactics work in the same ways... no aspect of the fighting part of
the game is different. That means that the gameplay is the same, to me.
> As
> I've explained to you many times, the arcade is one round and you pick
> two characters. There are many matchups in the arcade where
> strategically you want to pick two characters to counter your opponent's
> character choice(s). (Please, do not lengthen this thread
> unneccessarily by trying to say that being able to mirror match makes
> PSX XSF a perfect gameplay conversion.)
To you, the perfect conversion of the "fighting game" part means nothing,
just because you can't pick whoever you want. Fine, that's your opinion...
people can like whatever they want. I just feel differently about it. I'm
more concerned about the fighting part of the game.
> I can't believe that anyone
> posting to this newsgroup as long as you could dismiss a *fundamental*
> aspect of fighting games,
What is this supposed to mean?
> simply because you don't like playing the
> arcade competitively.
I don't? Since when?
> In any case, your repeated statements about perfect gameplay conversion
> are out and out wrong. If the best definition you can give of
> "gameplay" is "Training mode combos" then maybe that's why you see PSX
> XSF through such a warped looking-glass. I don't see how you can
> possibly say XSF is a great conversion then trash MSF. They're both the
> same in Training.
I'm not talking about training mode, I'm talking about the two-player VS
mode. Training mode happens to be the best reason to play XSF, but that has
nothing to do with this.
MSF is much, much worse. In two-player mode in XSF, you can have a
Wolverine/Charlie vs Charlie/Wolverine match that would play exactly like it
would in the arcade. In MSF (or MVC), nothing resembling the arcade is
possible. Alpha Counters take no meter and are unlimited, and the super
meter builds VERY quickly. These effectively ruin the conversion. It also
doesn't help that you have the reset the PSX (or lose to the computer) if
you want to pick different characters after a tag-team mode fight. And then
there's the minor fact that MSF is complete trash compared to XSF
(regardless of how XSF compares to other games). The VS games are less about
skill and more about fun and big combos... MSF took out the skill, the fun,
and the combos, leaving nothing.
Spider-Dan
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> > So, Chocobo, exactly how many times have you played Saturn A3?
>
> Less than you have, I'm sure. So is your point that you've played it
> more,
> so you must be right? Well, I've played PSX A3 and XSF more. Who
> cares.
Since I've never played Saturn A3, I'm not taking that stance.
> The
> Saturn version does have those differences, regardless of how many
> times I've played it.
You say Saturn A3 is nothing like the arcade. James Chen says it
is almost 100% perfect. James Chen wrote an in-depth FAQ on A3.
I think he is a more reliable judge of how close of a translation
Saturn A3 is.
> > Bzzt. Wrong. Your twisted perspective has blinded you. What you
> > mean
> > to say is, XSF's gameplay is perfect when you're playing in
> > Training.
> > In other words, you seem to be unable to differentiate a
> > near-perfect
> > translation of the combo engine from a perfect gameplay conversion.
>
> Clearly, we have different definitions of what's "gameplay" and what's
> extra. The same combos work, the same moves work the same way as the
> arcade,
> the same tactics work in the same ways... no aspect of the fighting
> part of
> the game is different. That means that the gameplay is the same, to
> me.
OK, let's get this straightened out, once and for all.
A. In XSF EX, the game is played in a best of X rounds
fashion, as opposed to the arcade which is one round only. This means
that, unlike the arcade, you can totally recover from an earlier
mistake; if you lose the first round perfect, that has no effect on
2nd (and 3rd) round, whereas in the arcade, if you lose your first
character perfect, your second character now has to take out two
lifebars before losing one lifebar total. I'm not interested in
whether this is more or less fair; for purposes of comparing how
faithful a conversion it is, anything different is bad.
B. In XSF EX, the default mode of play allows each person to pick
one playable character and one "helper," i.e. a character that is
used for an AC and double team. The arcade is tag team. Being able
to choose only one character totally changes the game strategically
from a matchup standpoint. Matchups have been one of the key factors
(if not THE key factor) in strategy since SF2 was created. You
dismiss this as if it's irrelevant.
C. Through the use of a code that is not immediately discernable
(meaning, a code that you have to look up on the net or in a magazine),
you can mirror match and play in a tag team-style like the arcade.
This, however, *does nothing to solve problem B*. It's a half-assed
workaround that requires both players to agree to use the same
characters to work. Quite simply, in a competitive setting, this option
is functionally irrelevant, and does nothing to help the game maintain
a faithful conversion to the arcade. Any option that relies on both
players' mutual agreement to play the game in anything other
every-man-for-himself is a joke. I could just as easily argue that A3
Chun's ineffective c.RH vs a jumping Zangief could be "faithfully
reproduced" on the home version by having the Zangief player agree to
let himself get hit by it anytime it's done and he would have been hit
in the arcade.
D. You can super cancel, which is a feature also not in the arcade.
Again, a code which must be researched must be used to turn this
feature off. (I mention the code because it is not a feature of the
game that is automatically included; it's a secret option that allows
the player to tweak the home version in ways that are not necessarily
intended, much like a code that allows you to turn the turbo to 10).
You attempt to take the good facets of A and C, add them up, and
arrive at a complete package. This is a logical error. You can't
have it both ways. If you are playing competitively, you are
presented with two options:
1. Select 1 playable character from 19, and play best X out of 2X-1
rounds. This is nothing like the arcade.
or
2. Select 2 playable characters from a choice of 2 characters.
Your choices are limited to whichever two characters your opponent
picks, so, yes, *you are limited to choosing one specific team*.
This is not an aspect in the arcade.
Anything less than the above two options is a bastardization of the
spirit of competition, and is akin to "Well, CCs don't really
affect A2, my friends and I have agreed not to use them."
> > As
> > I've explained to you many times, the arcade is one round and you
> > pick
> > two characters. There are many matchups in the arcade where
> > strategically you want to pick two characters to counter your
> > opponent's
> > character choice(s). (Please, do not lengthen this thread
> > unneccessarily by trying to say that being able to mirror match
> > makes PSX XSF a perfect gameplay conversion.)
>
> To you, the perfect conversion of the "fighting game" part means
> nothing,
> just because you can't pick whoever you want. Fine, that's your
> opinion...
> people can like whatever they want. I just feel differently about it.
> I'm more concerned about the fighting part of the game.
Apparently, you are totally indifferent as to the strategic aspect of
the game. You seem be only concerned with the engine itself.
> > I can't believe that anyone
> > posting to this newsgroup as long as you could dismiss a
> > *fundamental* aspect of fighting games,
>
> What is this supposed to mean?
It means that you have repeatedly dismissed the matchup aspect as
trivial.
> > simply because you don't like playing the
> > arcade competitively.
>
> I don't? Since when?
I thought you were in the camp that declared XSF unplayable as a
competitive game.
> > In any case, your repeated statements about perfect gameplay
> > conversion
> > are out and out wrong. If the best definition you can give of
> > "gameplay" is "Training mode combos" then maybe that's why you see
> > PSX
> > XSF through such a warped looking-glass. I don't see how you can
> > possibly say XSF is a great conversion then trash MSF. They're both
> > the same in Training.
>
> I'm not talking about training mode, I'm talking about the two-player
> VS
> mode. Training mode happens to be the best reason to play XSF, but
> that has nothing to do with this.
>
> MSF is much, much worse. In two-player mode in XSF, you can have a
> Wolverine/Charlie vs Charlie/Wolverine match that would play exactly
> like it
> would in the arcade.
This is a very sad example that you continue to parade. In the arcade,
you could choose to counter a Wolvie/Charlie team with say, Cyke/Sim.
In EX, you either have to pick the same team, or totally abandon tag
team play.
And BTW, you fail to mention any slowdown in XSF. Slowdown does affect
the gameplay; many people have complained about Saturn MSH and ST to
that effect (though MSH has many other much worse things to complain
about). The slowdown in PSX XSF is AT LEAST as bad as Saturn ST.
On a side note, if you think PSX XSF is a perfect gameplay conversion,
what do you call Saturn XSF?
> In MSF (or MVC), nothing resembling the arcade is
> possible. Alpha Counters take no meter and are unlimited, and the
> super
> meter builds VERY quickly. These effectively ruin the conversion.
So basically, you're complaining about ACs. Don't all the combos work
the same as the arcade? What are you complaining about, then?
> It also
> doesn't help that you have the reset the PSX (or lose to the computer)
> if you want to pick different characters after a tag-team mode fight.
I can think of nothing less relevant than that sentence.
> And then
> there's the minor fact that MSF is complete trash compared to XSF
> (regardless of how XSF compares to other games). The VS games are less
> about
> skill and more about fun and big combos... MSF took out the skill, the
> fun, and the combos, leaving nothing.
This sounds suspiciously like a degradation of PSX MSF as a game and not
as a conversion. Again, totally irrelevant.
Chocobo
> In article <3838CF33...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> > The
> > Saturn version does have those differences, regardless of how many
> > times I've played it.
>
> You say Saturn A3 is nothing like the arcade. James Chen says it
> is almost 100% perfect. James Chen wrote an in-depth FAQ on A3.
> I think he is a more reliable judge of how close of a translation
> Saturn A3 is.
>
Regardless of what James Chen says, the Saturn version does have the
different corner properties and the weak Dhalsim. I don't know enough to go
into extreme detail, but that keeps it away from the 100% IMO... there are
so many corner juggles and VCs that just won't work the same.
> OK, let's get this straightened out, once and for all.
>
> A. In XSF EX, the game is played in a best of X rounds
> fashion, as opposed to the arcade which is one round only. This means
> that, unlike the arcade, you can totally recover from an earlier
> mistake; if you lose the first round perfect, that has no effect on
> 2nd (and 3rd) round, whereas in the arcade, if you lose your first
> character perfect, your second character now has to take out two
> lifebars before losing one lifebar total. I'm not interested in
> whether this is more or less fair; for purposes of comparing how
> faithful a conversion it is, anything different is bad.
As far as I'm concerned, the "best of X rounds" format is nothing more than
an additional option to the real two-player game.
>
> B. In XSF EX, the default mode of play allows each person to pick
> one playable character and one "helper," i.e. a character that is
> used for an AC and double team. The arcade is tag team. Being able
> to choose only one character totally changes the game strategically
> from a matchup standpoint. Matchups have been one of the key factors
> (if not THE key factor) in strategy since SF2 was created. You
> dismiss this as if it's irrelevant.
This is part of the 1 on 1 fighting mode, which I really don't care about.
The only part worth using is the tag team mode.
>
> C. Through the use of a code that is not immediately discernable
> (meaning, a code that you have to look up on the net or in a magazine),
yeah, making the code required was pretty lame of Capcom...
> you can mirror match and play in a tag team-style like the arcade.
> This, however, *does nothing to solve problem B*. It's a half-assed
> workaround that requires both players to agree to use the same
> characters to work.
I'm not sure what you're getting at... you do get a tag team, you play it
with the same rules as the arcade.
> Quite simply, in a competitive setting, this option
> is functionally irrelevant, and does nothing to help the game maintain
> a faithful conversion to the arcade. Any option that relies on both
> players' mutual agreement to play the game in anything other
> every-man-for-himself is a joke. I could just as easily argue that A3
> Chun's ineffective c.RH vs a jumping Zangief could be "faithfully
> reproduced" on the home version by having the Zangief player agree to
> let himself get hit by it anytime it's done and he would have been hit
> in the arcade.
This is a load of crap. Other than selecting your character, each person is
playing every-man-for-himself. That Chun and Zangief argument is completely
irrelevant. The ONLY difference is that you won't get both characters that
you want... and let me get this straight, I do recognize that this is a
flaw. It does suck to have to pick one character that the other guy wants,
and sometimes you might need a certain team to win... one to take out each
of the opponent's characters. But other than this, the gameplay is just
about perfect. I count this as an inconvenience, but it's not vital to the
gameplay. I suppose the PSX conversion isn't good for tournaments, but you
can play competetively on it.
> D. You can super cancel, which is a feature also not in the arcade.
> Again, a code which must be researched must be used to turn this
> feature off. (I mention the code because it is not a feature of the
> game that is automatically included; it's a secret option that allows
> the player to tweak the home version in ways that are not necessarily
> intended, much like a code that allows you to turn the turbo to 10).
This is part of the one player "EX" mode that I don't care about.
> You attempt to take the good facets of A and C, add them up, and
> arrive at a complete package. This is a logical error.
I guess I'm stupid or something, because I don't understand what you mean by
this. I simply see that the gameplay itself is just like the arcade, and I
think that's a good thing.
> You can't
> have it both ways. If you are playing competitively, you are
> presented with two options:
>
> 1. Select 1 playable character from 19, and play best X out of 2X-1
> rounds. This is nothing like the arcade.
Right. It sucks.
> or
>
> 2. Select 2 playable characters from a choice of 2 characters.
> Your choices are limited to whichever two characters your opponent
> picks, so, yes, *you are limited to choosing one specific team*.
> This is not an aspect in the arcade.
Well, yeah. It's not exactly like the arcade, I never said it was. To be
fair, I usually play it so that each person picks one character, and then
gets the opponent's character for the partner.
> Anything less than the above two options is a bastardization of the
> spirit of competition, and is akin to "Well, CCs don't really
> affect A2, my friends and I have agreed not to use them."
That's a gameplay element, that is not the same at all.
> > To you, the perfect conversion of the "fighting game" part means
> > nothing,
> > just because you can't pick whoever you want. Fine, that's your
> > opinion...
> > people can like whatever they want. I just feel differently about it.
> > I'm more concerned about the fighting part of the game.
>
> Apparently, you are totally indifferent as to the strategic aspect of
> the game. You seem be only concerned with the engine itself.
There are only two characters on the screen at once, just like the arcade.
There are the same game playing strategies. How is "only concerned with the
engine itself" bad? That's what the game is.
> > > simply because you don't like playing the
> > > arcade competitively.
> >
> > I don't? Since when?
>
> I thought you were in the camp that declared XSF unplayable as a
> competitive game.
Oh, I thought you meant all arcade games. Yeah, it isn't so great as a real
competitive game.
> > > In any case, your repeated statements about perfect gameplay
> > > conversion
> > > are out and out wrong. If the best definition you can give of
> > > "gameplay" is "Training mode combos" then maybe that's why you see
> > > PSX
> > > XSF through such a warped looking-glass. I don't see how you can
> > > possibly say XSF is a great conversion then trash MSF. They're both
> > > the same in Training.
> >
> > I'm not talking about training mode, I'm talking about the two-player
> > VS
> > mode. Training mode happens to be the best reason to play XSF, but
> > that has nothing to do with this.
> >
> > MSF is much, much worse. In two-player mode in XSF, you can have a
> > Wolverine/Charlie vs Charlie/Wolverine match that would play exactly
> > like it
> > would in the arcade.
>
> This is a very sad example that you continue to parade. In the arcade,
> you could choose to counter a Wolvie/Charlie team with say, Cyke/Sim.
> In EX, you either have to pick the same team, or totally abandon tag
> team play.
What's so terrible about that?? "Sad example"... what other kind of example
can I use? That's how the game works.
> And BTW, you fail to mention any slowdown in XSF. Slowdown does affect
> the gameplay; many people have complained about Saturn MSH and ST to
> that effect (though MSH has many other much worse things to complain
> about). The slowdown in PSX XSF is AT LEAST as bad as Saturn ST.
Slowdown rarely, if ever, affects the gameplay. XSF is not a game where you
need perfect timing for everything, it's not like ST where the slightest
slowdown ruins it.
> On a side note, if you think PSX XSF is a perfect gameplay conversion,
> what do you call Saturn XSF?
It's the same.
> > In MSF (or MVC), nothing resembling the arcade is
> > possible. Alpha Counters take no meter and are unlimited, and the
> > super
> > meter builds VERY quickly. These effectively ruin the conversion.
>
> So basically, you're complaining about ACs. Don't all the combos work
> the same as the arcade? What are you complaining about, then?
As far as I know, the rest of the gameplay is close to the arcade. What I'm
complaining about are, as you say, the unlimited ACs which make the game
into 'whoever attacks first loses', which is a crappy game.
> > It also
> > doesn't help that you have the reset the PSX (or lose to the computer)
> > if you want to pick different characters after a tag-team mode fight.
>
> I can think of nothing less relevant than that sentence.
I think it's a valid point... it's pretty shitty to have to reset the game
to pick new teams.
> > And then
> > there's the minor fact that MSF is complete trash compared to XSF
> > (regardless of how XSF compares to other games). The VS games are less
> > about
> > skill and more about fun and big combos... MSF took out the skill, the
> > fun, and the combos, leaving nothing.
>
> This sounds suspiciously like a degradation of PSX MSF as a game and not
> as a conversion. Again, totally irrelevant.
That is nothing but a degradation of MSF as a game. You said you couldn't
see how I could trash MSF... well, that's part of it.
pnt
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:3838CF33...@mindspring.com...
: Spider-Dan wrote:
:
: > In article <3836CA1D...@mindspring.com>,: > >
: > > > In his Alpha 3 systems FAQ, James Chen says that the Saturn version
: > > > of Alpha 3 is "almost 100% perfect." The only difference he
: > > > mentions is the invincibility window on VCs. (And yes, he does note
: > > > that the PSX and DC versions are not arcade perfect. He also
: > > > specifically states that the Saturn version is definitely closer to
: > > > the arcade than both the PSX and DC versions.)
: > >
: > > I didn't say the PSX and other versions are exactly the same, I said
: > > they're a lot alike. Meaning that you can't expect something you learn
: > > corner properties from the arcade, both have the :new and improved"
: > > Dhalsim, etc.
: >
: > So, Chocobo, exactly how many times have you played Saturn A3?
:
: Less than you have, I'm sure. So is your point that you've played it more,
: so you must be right? Well, I've played PSX A3 and XSF more. Who cares.
: Saturn version does have those differences, regardless of how many times
: I've played it.
No one said it was arcade perfect, but at least it is "almost" arcade
perfect.
The strange pass right through glitches (cody's taunt = sidestep), random
damage, completely screwed priorities, supers with no invulnerability, moves
with extra range and moves with less range..etc...all are PSX crap. The
Saturn version is a big step over the PSX version. And as for slowdown, I
didn't see any slowdown except during v combos where there was a bunch of
stuff on the screen. A quick way to see this is to play shin akuma, do a
custom and go air fireball, ground fireball. but thats hardly enough to ruin
the gameplay. saturn is, as of now, the best conversion of a3 there is.
i'd say it's even more true to the arcade (besides the INTENTIONAL changes)
than psx xsf is.
Chocobo
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:3838CF33...@mindspring.com...
> : Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> : > So, Chocobo, exactly how many times have you played Saturn A3?
> :
> : Less than you have, I'm sure. So is your point that you've played it more,
> : so you must be right? Well, I've played PSX A3 and XSF more. Who cares.
> The
> : Saturn version does have those differences, regardless of how many times
> : I've played it.
>
> No one said it was arcade perfect, but at least it is "almost" arcade
> perfect.
All I said is that it's not an accurate representation of the arcade game.
> saturn is, as of now, the best conversion of a3 there is.
> i'd say it's even more true to the arcade (besides the INTENTIONAL changes)
depends on what you believe is intentional and accidental...
>
> than psx xsf is.
Well, yeah. Other than the dozens of changes, it's JUST like the arcade.
Spider-Dan
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> > You say Saturn A3 is nothing like the arcade. James Chen says it
> > is almost 100% perfect. James Chen wrote an in-depth FAQ on A3.
> > I think he is a more reliable judge of how close of a translation
> > Saturn A3 is.
>
> Regardless of what James Chen says, the Saturn version does have the
> different corner properties and the weak Dhalsim. I don't know enough
> to go
> into extreme detail, but that keeps it away from the 100% IMO... there
> are so many corner juggles and VCs that just won't work the same.
Funny that after writing that *huge* FAQ on exactly how A3 juggles
work, James wouldn't notice that the Saturn version is fucked up.
> > OK, let's get this straightened out, once and for all.
[snip]
> > you can mirror match and play in a tag team-style like the arcade.
> > This, however, *does nothing to solve problem B*. It's a half-assed
> > workaround that requires both players to agree to use the same
> > characters to work.
>
> I'm not sure what you're getting at... you do get a tag team, you play
> it with the same rules as the arcade.
No, you don't. You admit this later in this post. In the arcade, the
rules are you pick whatever characters (notice the *S*, which means
PLURAL)
you want, and I do the same. You don't pick my character in the arcade.
> > Quite simply, in a competitive setting, this option
> > is functionally irrelevant, and does nothing to help the game
> > maintain
> > a faithful conversion to the arcade. Any option that relies on both
> > players' mutual agreement to play the game in anything other
> > every-man-for-himself is a joke.
>
> This is a load of crap. Other than selecting your character,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Again, you dismiss the value of matchups in a fighting game.
> each person is
> playing every-man-for-himself. That Chun and Zangief argument is
> completely
> irrelevant. The ONLY difference is that you won't get both characters
> that
> you want... and let me get this straight, I do recognize that this is
> a flaw. It does suck to have to pick one character that the other guy
> wants,
> and sometimes you might need a certain team to win... one to take out
> each
> of the opponent's characters. But other than this, the gameplay is
> just
> about perfect. I count this as an inconvenience, but it's not vital to
> the
> gameplay. I suppose the PSX conversion isn't good for tournaments, but
> you can play competetively on it.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's an interesting quote. Let's look at another one....
> > You can't
> > have it both ways. If you are playing competitively, you are
> > presented with two options:
> >
> > 2. Select 2 playable characters from a choice of 2 characters.
> > Your choices are limited to whichever two characters your opponent
> > picks, so, yes, *you are limited to choosing one specific team*.
> > This is not an aspect in the arcade.
>
> Well, yeah. It's not exactly like the arcade, I never said it was.
> To be fair, I usually play it so that each person picks one character,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> and then gets the opponent's character for the partner.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Really? You do that to be fair? How nice. So, if you play someone
that doesn't like your character as their partner, how exactly do you
play? Do you vote on which characters you should use?
Actually, I think that's a neat idea. XSF is really one of the most
skillful fighting games ever. To be fair, though, I don't use infinites
or Sabretooth's j.RH or anything else that ruins my idea of it not being
stupid and broken. You can still play competitively though.
Of course, when you have to insert an arbitrary "To be fair" rule that
you make up, you aren't playing competitively at all. Details, details,
I know.
> > Anything less than the above two options is a bastardization of the
> > spirit of competition, and is akin to "Well, CCs don't really
> > affect A2, my friends and I have agreed not to use them."
>
> That's a gameplay element, that is not the same at all.
I can just imagine someone saying, "Wait, you're supposed to pick Ryu
as your partner! I picked your character as my partner! You're
hella fucking cheap!"
> > Apparently, you are totally indifferent as to the strategic aspect
> > of the game. You seem be only concerned with the engine itself.
>
> There are only two characters on the screen at once, just like the
> arcade.
> There are the same game playing strategies. How is "only concerned
> with the engine itself" bad? That's what the game is.
By the same logic, if Capcom released a SF3 EX on 2 discs, with 5
characters on each disc (IOW 5 playable characters at a time), it would
be totally acceptable (and have "100% arcade perfect gameplay"). As you
are fond of saying, "The game plays exactly the same as the arcade, you
just can't pick everyone you want."
> > On a side note, if you think PSX XSF is a perfect gameplay
> > conversion, what do you call Saturn XSF?
>
> It's the same.
You're joking, right? You see Saturn XSF as being no better of a
conversion than XSF EX? That contradicts your statements above.
Chocobo
> In article <3839F085...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > Spider-Dan wrote:
> >
> > > You say Saturn A3 is nothing like the arcade. James Chen says it
> > > is almost 100% perfect. James Chen wrote an in-depth FAQ on A3.
> > > I think he is a more reliable judge of how close of a translation
> > > Saturn A3 is.
> >
> > Regardless of what James Chen says, the Saturn version does have the
> > different corner properties and the weak Dhalsim. I don't know enough
> > to go
> > into extreme detail, but that keeps it away from the 100% IMO... there
> > are so many corner juggles and VCs that just won't work the same.
>
> Funny that after writing that *huge* FAQ on exactly how A3 juggles
> work, James wouldn't notice that the Saturn version is fucked up.
So you're saying that James is right, and I am wrong? Whatever... if proof
isn't enough for you, I certainly can't prove anything.
> > > you can mirror match and play in a tag team-style like the arcade.
> > > This, however, *does nothing to solve problem B*. It's a half-assed
> > > workaround that requires both players to agree to use the same
> > > characters to work.
> >
> > I'm not sure what you're getting at... you do get a tag team, you play
> > it with the same rules as the arcade.
>
> No, you don't. You admit this later in this post. In the arcade, the
> rules are you pick whatever characters (notice the *S*, which means
> PLURAL)
> you want, and I do the same. You don't pick my character in the arcade.
That's right, as everyone knows.
> > > Quite simply, in a competitive setting, this option
> > > is functionally irrelevant, and does nothing to help the game
> > > maintain
> > > a faithful conversion to the arcade. Any option that relies on both
> > > players' mutual agreement to play the game in anything other
> > > every-man-for-himself is a joke.
> >
> > This is a load of crap. Other than selecting your character,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Again, you dismiss the value of matchups in a fighting game.
I just acknowledged it, so how am I dismissing it?
> > gameplay. I suppose the PSX conversion isn't good for tournaments, but
> > you can play competetively on it.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> That's an interesting quote. Let's look at another one....
>
> > > You can't
> > > have it both ways. If you are playing competitively, you are
> > > presented with two options:
> > >
> > > 2. Select 2 playable characters from a choice of 2 characters.
> > > Your choices are limited to whichever two characters your opponent
> > > picks, so, yes, *you are limited to choosing one specific team*.
> > > This is not an aspect in the arcade.
> >
> > Well, yeah. It's not exactly like the arcade, I never said it was.
> > To be fair, I usually play it so that each person picks one character,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > and then gets the opponent's character for the partner.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
Are those quotes supposed to be related?
> Really? You do that to be fair? How nice.
Well, as I've explained if you're going to say you don't give a shit and
pick whoever you want, you get the 1 on 1 game, so you kind of have to do
this.
> So, if you play someone
> that doesn't like your character as their partner, how exactly do you
> play?
Tough for them. Why would someone care so much about not having a certain
partner, anyway?
> Do you vote on which characters you should use?
No.
> Actually, I think that's a neat idea. XSF is really one of the most
> skillful fighting games ever. To be fair, though, I don't use infinites
> or Sabretooth's j.RH or anything else that ruins my idea of it not being
> stupid and broken. You can still play competitively though.
>
Whatever. As I've said before, that's part of the "fighting game" part of
the whole package. That's different.
>
> Of course, when you have to insert an arbitrary "To be fair" rule that
> you make up, you aren't playing competitively at all. Details, details,
> I know.
We've done this crap WAY too many times now... what are you trying to
accomplish? I'll say it again... I'm talking about the "fighting game part".
Picking one character per person isn't "to be fair" anyway, it's "to get the
tag team mode". It just happens to also be fair.
> > > Anything less than the above two options is a bastardization of the
> > > spirit of competition, and is akin to "Well, CCs don't really
> > > affect A2, my friends and I have agreed not to use them."
> >
> > That's a gameplay element, that is not the same at all.
>
> I can just imagine someone saying, "Wait, you're supposed to pick Ryu
> as your partner! I picked your character as my partner! You're
> hella fucking cheap!"
What the hell is this supposed to mean? Are you just trying to be insulting,
now? I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know if I'm meant to understand you,
or if it's just an insult in the future.
> > > Apparently, you are totally indifferent as to the strategic aspect
> > > of the game. You seem be only concerned with the engine itself.
> >
> > There are only two characters on the screen at once, just like the
> > arcade.
> > There are the same game playing strategies. How is "only concerned
> > with the engine itself" bad? That's what the game is.
>
> By the same logic, if Capcom released a SF3 EX on 2 discs, with 5
> characters on each disc (IOW 5 playable characters at a time), it would
> be totally acceptable (and have "100% arcade perfect gameplay"). As you
> are fond of saying, "The game plays exactly the same as the arcade, you
> just can't pick everyone you want."
Obviously, that is not the same at all. You can have any one on one matchup
on PSX as you can have in the arcade. Remember, only two characters are on
the screen at a time.
> > > On a side note, if you think PSX XSF is a perfect gameplay
> > > conversion, what do you call Saturn XSF?
> >
> > It's the same.
>
> You're joking, right? You see Saturn XSF as being no better of a
> conversion than XSF EX? That contradicts your statements above.
No, I said Saturn XSF is no better of a gameplay conversion. Saturn XSF is
better overall.
Chocobo
> In article <383AE350...@mindspring.com>,
> Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> > Spider-Dan wrote:
> >
> > > Funny that after writing that *huge* FAQ on exactly how A3 juggles
> > > work, James wouldn't notice that the Saturn version is fucked up.
> >
> > So you're saying that James is right, and I am wrong?
>
> No. I'm saying that he knows what he's talking about in this case, and
> you don't. That may amount to the same thing, though.
That is the same thing.
> > Whatever... if proof
> > isn't enough for you, I certainly can't prove anything.
>
> What exactly have you proven? *By your own admission* you "don't
> know enough to go into extreme detail".
But I DO know that Dhalsim is weak and the corner properties have changes.
What I meant by that is, I can't provide you with a huge list like I can
with Alpha 3.
> James does, and has.
All he has to say is "it's perfect" for extreme detail.
> As far as I've seen, the most detail you've went into on Saturn A3
> are some halfhearted references to being like the PSX version,
> even when James and pnt say "No, it isn't."
I really don't care what they say. People have told me that the PSX version
is a great conversion too.
> > > > This is a load of crap. Other than selecting your character,
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > Again, you dismiss the value of matchups in a fighting game.
> >
> > I just acknowledged it, so how am I dismissing it?
>
> "Other than the fact that you can't do chain combos, COTA for the PC
> is arcade perfect."
How many times do I have to say it? That's related to the "fighting game"
part of the game.
> If a game has something that fundamentally changes it from the arcade
> to that degree, no matter how well the other aspects are done, it does
> not qualify as "arcade perfect" or anything LIKE IT. To suggest
> that "with this exception it's arcade perfect" implies that the
> exception is something minor. Totally changing the strategy of
> character matchups is not minor.
Saturn A2 has a training mode, nothing like that is in the arcade.
> > > > gameplay. I suppose the PSX conversion isn't good for tournaments,
> > > > but you can play competetively on it.
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > >
> > > That's an interesting quote. Let's look at another one....
> > >
> > > > To be fair, I usually play it so that each person picks one
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > > character,
> ^^^^^^^^^
> > > > and then gets the opponent's character for the partner.
> > > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > Are those quotes supposed to be related?
>
> You say that the game can be played competitively, then shortly
> thereafter state a "house rule," which are generally the antithesis of
> competition.
The house rule is necessary to get the arcade-like mode... it's not to
ensure fairness and prevent "cheapness".
> The fact that you say that the PSX version "isn't good for tournaments"
> shows your bias. The PSX version is TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE to play in a
> tournament (at least, as acceptable as any other Vs. game). It's just
> that in a tournament, your pretty mental bubble of an "arcade perfect"
> XSF bursts, because true competitive play forces the 1-on-1 mode.
I only said that because there are better versions... unless the PSX version
is the only thing available, it'd be pretty silly to hold a tournament on
it.
> > > Really? You do that to be fair? How nice.
> >
> > Well, as I've explained if you're going to say you don't give a shit
> > and
> > pick whoever you want, you get the 1 on 1 game, so you kind of have to
> > do this.
>
> So in other words, you can't play the "arcade perfect mode"
> competitively.
No. I've explained this before. There is nothing preventing you from trying
to win with the characters you have.
> > > So, if you play someone
> > > that doesn't like your character as their partner, how exactly do
> > > you play?
> >
> > Tough for them.
>
> Don't you mean tough for *you*? If they decide not to go along with
> your house rule, you will be playing 1 on 1.
Either way, it doesn't work.
> > > By the same logic, if Capcom released a SF3 EX on 2 discs, with 5
> > > characters on each disc (IOW 5 playable characters at a time), it
> > > would
> > > be totally acceptable (and have "100% arcade perfect gameplay"). As
> > > you
> > > are fond of saying, "The game plays exactly the same as the arcade,
> > > you just can't pick everyone you want."
> >
> > Obviously, that is not the same at all. You can have any one on one
> > matchup on PSX as you can have in the arcade.
>
> Too bad the arcade is not 1 on 1.
The arcade DOES have one character against one at a time. You don't play
with both of your characters out there at the same time. Are you doing this
just to be annoying?
> > Remember, only two characters are on the screen at a time.
>
> Nice try. Again, that sounds suspiciously like you're implying that
> since there is only one character playable by each person at any one
> time in XSF, that there is no matchup strategy with regards to
> tag team. Which is false.
I never said there is none.
> Additionally, stating a smokescreen excuse for not being able to select
> 4 different characters is parallel to saying "SF3 EX is fine. Remember,
> each person can only select one character at any given time." It's
> bullshit and you know it.
It is nothing like your SF3 EX example.
> > > > > On a side note, if you think PSX XSF is a perfect gameplay
> > > > > conversion, what do you call Saturn XSF?
> > > >
> > > > It's the same.
> > >
> > > You're joking, right? You see Saturn XSF as being no better of a
> > > conversion than XSF EX? That contradicts your statements above.
> >
> > No, I said Saturn XSF is no better of a gameplay conversion. Saturn
> > XSF is better overall.
>
> If I remember correctly (and I'm quoting), you said:
>
> "The ONLY difference is that you won't get both characters that you
> want... and let me get this straight, I do recognize that this is a
> flaw. It does suck to have to pick one character that the other guy
> wants, and sometimes you might need a certain team to win... one to
> take out each of the opponent's characters. But other than this, the
> gameplay is just about perfect."
>
> That gameplay flaw is not in the Saturn version. Therefore, the
> Saturn version is a better gameplay conversion.
>
Again, that is NOT part of the "fighting game" part of the game.
> It would also seem that that statement puts you in a pretty tough
> spot with regards to XSF EX's 100% arcade perfect gameplay, does
> it not? Either matchups are not a part of gameplay and you were
> just lying when you said the above, or they are and XSF EX is a piece
> of crap. Relatively.
No, it does not put me in a tough spot. The only "either" here is either
you're doing this to be annoying (possibly because you just don't like PSX
conversions), or you're incapable of understanding me as I repeatedly state
the same points.
Spider-Dan
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> > Funny that after writing that *huge* FAQ on exactly how A3 juggles
> > work, James wouldn't notice that the Saturn version is fucked up.
>
> So you're saying that James is right, and I am wrong?
No. I'm saying that he knows what he's talking about in this case, and
you don't. That may amount to the same thing, though.
> Whatever... if proof
> isn't enough for you, I certainly can't prove anything.
What exactly have you proven? *By your own admission* you "don't
know enough to go into extreme detail". James does, and has.
As far as I've seen, the most detail you've went into on Saturn A3
are some halfhearted references to being like the PSX version,
even when James and pnt say "No, it isn't."
> > > This is a load of crap. Other than selecting your character,
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > Again, you dismiss the value of matchups in a fighting game.
>
> I just acknowledged it, so how am I dismissing it?
"Other than the fact that you can't do chain combos, COTA for the PC
is arcade perfect."
If a game has something that fundamentally changes it from the arcade
to that degree, no matter how well the other aspects are done, it does
not qualify as "arcade perfect" or anything LIKE IT. To suggest
that "with this exception it's arcade perfect" implies that the
exception is something minor. Totally changing the strategy of
character matchups is not minor.
(Yes, I am aware of the COTA patch. Idiots, stay silent.)
> > > gameplay. I suppose the PSX conversion isn't good for tournaments,
> > > but you can play competetively on it.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> > That's an interesting quote. Let's look at another one....
> >
> > > To be fair, I usually play it so that each person picks one
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> > > character,
^^^^^^^^^
> > > and then gets the opponent's character for the partner.
> > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> Are those quotes supposed to be related?
You say that the game can be played competitively, then shortly
thereafter state a "house rule," which are generally the antithesis of
competition.
The fact that you say that the PSX version "isn't good for tournaments"
shows your bias. The PSX version is TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE to play in a
tournament (at least, as acceptable as any other Vs. game). It's just
that in a tournament, your pretty mental bubble of an "arcade perfect"
XSF bursts, because true competitive play forces the 1-on-1 mode.
> > Really? You do that to be fair? How nice.
>
> Well, as I've explained if you're going to say you don't give a shit
> and
> pick whoever you want, you get the 1 on 1 game, so you kind of have to
> do this.
So in other words, you can't play the "arcade perfect mode"
competitively.
> > So, if you play someone
> > that doesn't like your character as their partner, how exactly do
> > you play?
>
> Tough for them.
Don't you mean tough for *you*? If they decide not to go along with
your house rule, you will be playing 1 on 1.
> Why would someone care so much about not having a certain
> partner, anyway?
Certain characters are much better as a playable character than as a
"partner" and vice versa (Bison comes to mind as the former, Juggernaut
as the latter).
> > Actually, I think that's a neat idea. XSF is really one of the most
> > skillful fighting games ever. To be fair, though, I don't use
> > infinites
> > or Sabretooth's j.RH or anything else that ruins my idea of it not
> > being
> > stupid and broken. You can still play competitively though.
>
> Whatever. As I've said before, that's part of the "fighting game" part
> of the whole package. That's different.
You mean, the game engine.
> > Of course, when you have to insert an arbitrary "To be fair" rule
> > that
> > you make up, you aren't playing competitively at all. Details,
> > details, I know.
>
> We've done this crap WAY too many times now... what are you trying to
> accomplish? I'll say it again... I'm talking about the "fighting game
> part".
> Picking one character per person isn't "to be fair" anyway, it's "to
> get the tag team mode". It just happens to also be fair.
You keep mentioning the "fighting game part". By that, I assume you
mean the engine. Do you believe that the engine is the sole component
of the gameplay? Or rather, to be more direct:
In which aspect of the game (e.g. graphics, sound, gameplay) does
matchup strategy fall into? (Feel free to supply your own aspect if
you do not feel the above examples are sufficient.)
> > By the same logic, if Capcom released a SF3 EX on 2 discs, with 5
> > characters on each disc (IOW 5 playable characters at a time), it
> > would
> > be totally acceptable (and have "100% arcade perfect gameplay"). As
> > you
> > are fond of saying, "The game plays exactly the same as the arcade,
> > you just can't pick everyone you want."
>
> Obviously, that is not the same at all. You can have any one on one
> matchup on PSX as you can have in the arcade.
Too bad the arcade is not 1 on 1.
> Remember, only two characters are on the screen at a time.
Nice try. Again, that sounds suspiciously like you're implying that
since there is only one character playable by each person at any one
time in XSF, that there is no matchup strategy with regards to
tag team. Which is false.
Additionally, stating a smokescreen excuse for not being able to select
4 different characters is parallel to saying "SF3 EX is fine. Remember,
each person can only select one character at any given time." It's
bullshit and you know it.
> > > > On a side note, if you think PSX XSF is a perfect gameplay
> > > > conversion, what do you call Saturn XSF?
> > >
> > > It's the same.
> >
> > You're joking, right? You see Saturn XSF as being no better of a
> > conversion than XSF EX? That contradicts your statements above.
>
> No, I said Saturn XSF is no better of a gameplay conversion. Saturn
> XSF is better overall.
If I remember correctly (and I'm quoting), you said:
"The ONLY difference is that you won't get both characters that you
want... and let me get this straight, I do recognize that this is a
flaw. It does suck to have to pick one character that the other guy
wants, and sometimes you might need a certain team to win... one to
take out each of the opponent's characters. But other than this, the
gameplay is just about perfect."
That gameplay flaw is not in the Saturn version. Therefore, the
Saturn version is a better gameplay conversion.
It would also seem that that statement puts you in a pretty tough
spot with regards to XSF EX's 100% arcade perfect gameplay, does
it not? Either matchups are not a part of gameplay and you were
just lying when you said the above, or they are and XSF EX is a piece
of crap. Relatively.
--
CakewaIker
arcade hardware.
Who really gives a shit?
Spider-Dan
Chocobo <cho...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Spider-Dan wrote:
>
> > > I just acknowledged it, so how am I dismissing it?
> >
> > "Other than the fact that you can't do chain combos, COTA for the PC
> > is arcade perfect."
>
> How many times do I have to say it? That's related to the "fighting
> game" part of the game.
You are now clearly avoiding the issue, by way of semantics. The fact
that you conveniently clipped my question as to whether character
selection is part of gameplay illustrates this.
If you'd like, I can say "Other than the fact that SF3 EX only has
5 characters at a time, it's arcade perfect." Now you don't have
to be bothered with the "fighting game part of the game".
> > If a game has something that fundamentally changes it from the
> > arcade
> > to that degree, no matter how well the other aspects are done, it
> > does
> > not qualify as "arcade perfect" or anything LIKE IT. To suggest
> > that "with this exception it's arcade perfect" implies that the
> > exception is something minor. Totally changing the strategy of
> > character matchups is not minor.
>
> Saturn A2 has a training mode, nothing like that is in the arcade.
It also has an illustrations mode. I fail to see your point. Unless,
of course, your point is that adding selectable extras (Saturn A2) is
somehow equivalent to not having all the aspects of the original
(XSF EX). That would be an idiotic stance, though, so I'll just
ask you; what exactly was the point of mentioning Training?
> The house rule is necessary to get the arcade-like mode... it's not to
> ensure fairness and prevent "cheapness".
>
> > The fact that you say that the PSX version "isn't good for
> > tournaments"
> > shows your bias. The PSX version is TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE to play in a
> > tournament (at least, as acceptable as any other Vs. game). It's
> > just
> > that in a tournament, your pretty mental bubble of an "arcade
> > perfect"
> > XSF bursts, because true competitive play forces the 1-on-1 mode.
>
> I only said that because there are better versions... unless the PSX
> version
> is the only thing available, it'd be pretty silly to hold a tournament
> on it.
So how would the "gameplay" in a 'no rules' XSF EX tournament compare
to that of a 'no rules' arcade XSF tournament?
> > > > Really? You do that to be fair? How nice.
> > >
> > > Well, as I've explained if you're going to say you don't give a
> > > shit and
> > > pick whoever you want, you get the 1 on 1 game, so you kind of
> > > have do this.
> >
> > So in other words, you can't play the "arcade perfect mode"
> > competitively.
>
> No. I've explained this before. There is nothing preventing you from
> trying to win with the characters you have.
If you don't have autonomous character selection, IT'S NOT COMPETITIVE.
Period.
> > > Obviously, that is not the same at all. You can have any one on
> > > one matchup on PSX as you can have in the arcade.
> >
> > Too bad the arcade is not 1 on 1.
>
> The arcade DOES have one character against one at a time. You don't
> play
> with both of your characters out there at the same time. Are you doing
> this just to be annoying?
>
> > > Remember, only two characters are on the screen at a time.
> >
> > Nice try. Again, that sounds suspiciously like you're implying that
> > since there is only one character playable by each person at any one
> > time in XSF, that there is no matchup strategy with regards to
> > tag team. Which is false.
>
> I never said there is none.
In the first paragraph of the above quote, you state that you can have
any 1-on-1 matchup. Since the ARCADE'S matchups are based on 2-on-2,
what the fuck is your point?? THE MATCHUP STRATEGY IS STILL DIFFERENT.
> > Additionally, stating a smokescreen excuse for not being able to
> > select
> > 4 different characters is parallel to saying "SF3 EX is fine.
> > Remember,
> > each person can only select one character at any given time." It's
> > bullshit and you know it.
>
> It is nothing like your SF3 EX example.
Both of them use irrelevant factoids to sidestep a point.
> > > > You're joking, right? You see Saturn XSF as being no better of
> > > > a conversion than XSF EX? That contradicts your statements
> > > > above.
> > >
> > > No, I said Saturn XSF is no better of a gameplay conversion.
> > > Saturn XSF is better overall.
> >
> > If I remember correctly (and I'm quoting), you said:
> >
> > "The ONLY difference is that you won't get both characters that you
> > want... and let me get this straight, I do recognize that this is a
> > flaw. It does suck to have to pick one character that the other guy
> > wants, and sometimes you might need a certain team to win... one to
> > take out each of the opponent's characters. But other than this, the
> > gameplay is just about perfect."
> >
> > That gameplay flaw is not in the Saturn version. Therefore, the
> > Saturn version is a better gameplay conversion.
>
> Again, that is NOT part of the "fighting game" part of the game.
Again, you attempt to sidestep the issue with semantics. Your use
of the term "'fighting game' part of the game" (IOW the engine) is
an attempt to avoid saying "gameplay". Whether or not the engine
is close to the arcade has never been in question. As you refuse
to admit directly, matchup strategy is a part of gameplay. If the
matchup strategy of the arcade is different in XSF EX, then by
no means is it anywhere near "100% arcade perfect gameplay".
Maybe you should start saying, "XSF EX has a 100% arcade perfect
engine." That's reasonably close to the truth.
> > It would also seem that that statement puts you in a pretty tough
> > spot with regards to XSF EX's 100% arcade perfect gameplay, does
> > it not? Either matchups are not a part of gameplay and you were
> > just lying when you said the above, or they are and XSF EX is a
> > piece of crap. Relatively.
>
> No, it does not put me in a tough spot. The only "either" here is
> either
> you're doing this to be annoying (possibly because you just don't like
> PSX
> conversions), or you're incapable of understanding me as I repeatedly
> state the same points.
Speaking of incapable to understand, you conveniently snipped my
question. I'll ask you again:
Are character matchups part of gameplay?
If not, your earlier quote contradicts you.
("But other than this, the gameplay is just about perfect.")
If so, XSF does not have '100% arcade perfect gameplay'.
(This can actually be inferred from your quote above.)
Do not bother replying if you cut that question again.
pnt
A board: $50
XSF board: $200
(Shipping from Japan: $80)
Maybe it isn't worth it to some people.
Also, you act as though "everyone" should buy the arcade game.
Do you really think that enouhg XSF boards are OUT there for
everyone to have??? These aren't CD's for PSX and Saturn, these
are arcade boards for arcades. I doubt that there are enough
for us to replace every xsf cd with a board.
CakewaIker <cakew...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:19991123223801...@ng-ff1.aol.com...
: Aw, why doesn't everyone quit their fucking whining and just buy the damn
pnt
: that doesn't like your character as their partner, how exactly do you
: play? Do you vote on which characters you should use?
:
: Actually, I think that's a neat idea. XSF is really one of the most
: skillful fighting games ever. To be fair, though, I don't use infinites
: or Sabretooth's j.RH or anything else that ruins my idea of it not being
: stupid and broken. You can still play competitively though.
:
: Of course, when you have to insert an arbitrary "To be fair" rule that
: you make up, you aren't playing competitively at all. Details, details,
: I know.
:
: > > Anything less than the above two options is a bastardization of the
: > > spirit of competition, and is akin to "Well, CCs don't really
: > > affect A2, my friends and I have agreed not to use them."
: >
: > That's a gameplay element, that is not the same at all.
:
: I can just imagine someone saying, "Wait, you're supposed to pick Ryu
: as your partner! I picked your character as my partner! You're
: hella fucking cheap!"
Pay attention. Chocobo has argued for the use of infinites and such.
He certainly doesn't believe in "dumbing down" the gameplay.
When he says "to be fair," what he means is this: on the XSF version,
you have to pick one anothers' characters or you don't get the tag
team mode. So if one person goes off and picks his very own special
team, the other person has to play those characters (that he may never
have touched before). So a compromise is made: each player selects
one character that he wants on his team, then he selects his opponent's
character. So I might pick Juggy and Choc picks Cyclops. Then I pick
Cyke and he picks Jug to ensure tag team mode.
Once you get in the game, it's a Jug/Cyke vs Cyke/Jug match. No
holds barred...
I see what you are trying to say, that character choice is a part of
the game and to limit that is to limit the competition (and I fully
agree, I definitely think XSF is a terrible conversion overall).
But this is more like making a compromise to try to get a reasonable
conversion of the arcade game. That Jug/Cyke vs Cyke/Jug match is
pretty damn close to the arcade, for what it is. In a way it's like
playing ST on the Saturn and agreeing to keep the handicap on the
default, although it would be better for your game if your character
did double damage.
Yes, I wish I had a saturn and 4-meg ram cart, for alpha 3, xsf,
whatever... but I would also need a Mod board or something to
play imports etc. If anyone can hook me up with the infos on
mod boards (i know where to get the other shit).. email me.
Chocobo
> Aw, why doesn't everyone quit their fucking whining and just buy the damn
> arcade hardware.
Who's whining? Did you even read the thread?
> Who really gives a shit?
A few people do... not everyone, obviously. So what? I wonder why you decided
to put this crap at the end of a post with actual information in it, rather
than the 30 post (and counting) thread on whether Bob from Montana thinks the
super DP looks as cool as the super fireball.
MasSnead2
>SuperGun: $300
>A board: $50
>XSF board: $200
>(Shipping from Japan: $80)
>
>Maybe it isn't worth it to some people.
>
>Also, you act as though "everyone" should buy the arcade game.
>Do you really think that enouhg XSF boards are OUT there for
>everyone to have??? These aren't CD's for PSX and Saturn, these
>are arcade boards for arcades. I doubt that there are enough
>for us to replace every xsf cd with a board.
>
>CakewaIker <cakew...@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:19991123223801...@ng-ff1.aol.com...
>: arcade hardware.
>:
>: Who really gives a shit?
Yeah,
You got half of what he's saying.
I think he means, if it IS not worth to a person to go buy the arcade hardware,
then they should'nt be bitching about home conversions anyway.
Shiranui Gen-An
pnt <drw...@richmond.infi.net> wrote in message
news:81h0je$n51$1...@nw003t.infi.net...
> Yes, I wish I had a saturn and 4-meg ram cart, for alpha 3, xsf,
> whatever... but I would also need a Mod board or something to
> play imports etc. If anyone can hook me up with the infos on
> mod boards (i know where to get the other shit).. email me.
>
>
>
You could just get a US Saturn and send it to NCS (www.ncsx.com) to get a
mod switch installed that lets you toggle between US and JPN modes. Or, I
think they still have Japanese Saturn consoles that you can order from them
already modded. Note that this is different from the 21-pin mod that lets
you play CD-R "backups."
Captain Spandex
XvSF, kinda confuses me; what non-fighting-game part is there in XvSF? The
menus? The character select? Yeah, that screen's arcade perfect, it's just that
the whole damn rest of the game isn't. I personally think that, although it's
the best they could do, the PSx version of XvSF is pitiful in comparison to the
arcade and Saturn versions. Please, let's drop this thread as we're all getting
tired of it. Why don't you two just argue through the email? : )
Also, I liked the comparison to SF3 EX. Rather clever, no? : )
- - - --=Captain Spandex=-- - - -
"I'm not gay! I'm big-boned! Oh, wait..."
"It is a mistake to believe that any major
problem can be solved with just a potato."
-Douglas Adams
Chocobo
> You know, this whole thread, with its speak of the "Fighting game part" of
> XvSF, kinda confuses me; what non-fighting-game part is there in XvSF? The
> menus? The character select? Yeah, that screen's arcade perfect, it's just that
> the whole damn rest of the game isn't.
Actually, the character select screen isn't perfect, the animation rates have been
lowered to one or two frames per character. Not that anyone cares about that. The
"whole damn rest of the game" as you call it, meaning the GAMEPLAY, is perfect. But
who cares about that.
Chocobo
picked ___ and ___. I'm going to pick the two characters who are best
against them, to give myself an advantage." and you can't do this on the
PSX, since each team is equal. I might argue that the equality of the
teams is a good thing, but it really takes away from the fun. I guess
you think this is the most important part of the game, but to me it's
not a HUGE deal. There is no way in hell that that particular difference
makes XSF a "jillion times" worse than A3, where sooooo much is changed
from the arcade.
Makka 5000
>> whatever
Just get the 4 in one or the 5 in one plug mod it only cost like 20 thirty
bucks. And it fits snugly in the cartrige slot in back of the saturn simliarly
to a super nintendo THats what i did.
i have Xmen vs street fighter- street fighter zero 3- radiant silvergun plus
numerous domestic releases like 3 dirty dwarves