181

SFIII is the pinnacle of 2D fighters, imo. Soundtrack is fucking epic, and the parry system offers something new for higher level players. Plus, the graphics still retained the “capcom charm” that I feel SFIV lacks entirely.

As a Sean player, though, I prefer 2nd Impact since he got nerfed big time in 3S. I’d like to see another SFIII release in the vein of Darkstalkers Chronicles, that would allow you to pick and choose characters from NG and 2I and pit them against characters from the 3S roster. That way, I could have my cake and eat it too.

What were they thinking when they switched up Sean’s dp?

EDIT: On the parry system debate… Why do some people feel like this is some sort of “get out of jail free card”? It most certainly does not “trump all”. If anything, it’s just a tool to use against flowchart players who always do the same shit over and over. Nothing wrong with that, but if that’s your game, then I can see why 3S isn’t for you. But if you’re up against a player who can mix it up well, then the parry system won’t do you much good. It could potentially save your ass, but the risk involved just isn’t worth it.

Maybe we use parry for different reasons. I use it as a “turnover” against predictable pressure players, and to eliminate chip damage special attack spammers.

182

This is kind of what I was talking about. Exchanging fireballs is a tense game for momentum and distance, not merely canceling the opponents chip-damage-mobile with your own (yes, even O. Sagat mirrors though I think he’s somewhat retarded.) Saying stuff like that makes it seem like you don’t understand or appreciate it, that you can’t see the greater game going on behind the qcf+p. I think that’s part of where the hate comes from.

ST is a far far faster game, lethal shit is going on every single moment. Its extremely offense oriented because of high damage, dizzy, 0f throws etc. It is not easier to turtle in ST. So when a self proclaimed fan of 3S says stuff like this its annoying, because you can like the game for whatever merits it has but not for completely fictional ones.

This is not directed wholly at you and the earlier comment was also meant to be taken in general.

183

Ok then,

It doesn’t matter if it does more damage, it’s not 3 stock. The ability to land CSB or Shippu in quick succession and the fact that there is plenty of ways to land it* does help define these characters*. Not solely, but is a paramount factor. To say it isn’t is dumb. You know this. Stop clutching at straws.

And out of Ken, Makoto, Dudley and Akuma. Only Dudley can be played with another super without it affecting him. SA1 Ken is useless.

184

SA1 Ken useless? News to me. Without getting in to a dumb debate over it, I’ll say that SA1 is all I really used when playing Ken. I also found it quite easy to cancel out of fierce punch to confirm the SA1 to ensure good damage.

185

Just because fireball pressure is gone doesn’t mean there’s suddenly no strategy (though, good Remy players can still fireball pressure, hard as it may be … example: [media=youtube]9jEPVdhaz3M&feature=related[/media]). Or that pressure doesn’t exist, or that zoning has no purpose. Zoning in 3s is almost entirely different, and it’s weight isn’t the same as it is in ST, but it isn’t gone.

But hell, there is no holy grail of fighting games. None of them cover everything. A lot of folks who love 3s treat it like the end all of fighters and view ST as a dated game for old dudes who love to throw fireballs. Which ignores all the nuances of the game, and can be pretty obnoxious. But ST players tend to think 3s is just a bunch of random shit and you only win if you’re lucky or good at guessing.

Even here, where you argue that anyone who has something good to say about 3s is just making shit up and that the game has no strategy just comes off like someone who doesn’t get the game, or just isn’t any good at it. In the same way someone saying ST is turtle-friendly or all about spamming doesn’t get the game (ST is aggressive as all get out, and you can die in two mistakes … if you wanna turtle up, 4 is more friendly than 2 or 3 ever were). It’s the old pissing contest between the two that goes nowhere and convinces no one.

I never knew that it was so odd for me to like and defend both series until about 4 years ago and I started reading around the internets on fighters again. I stopped played fighters from about 2001 - 2006, but I was never as picky as long as the game was solid. And really, I’m actually glad that they all play so different. I’d get bored otherwise.

One thing I will definitely give to the 3 series, though, is how much more I enjoy charge characters in it. I have much more fun with them than in 2 or 4 by a long shot.

186

Say “you know this” and “stop clutching at straws” again. It’s makes your argument seem really thought out and important.

And of course it helps define a character. That’s a given. Everything they have helps define them, good or bad. But it isn’t “the character”. Ken is not “Super 3.” That is not his arsenal. And of course picking a different super affects the character. Some characters in the game actually choose different Supers based on their particular play style, or the specific match up. Crazy talk, I know, but it happens. But S1 Makoto is no good? You being serious here? Ken is useless without S3? Really? Hell, Ken, Makoto, Akuma and Dudley are solid without using supers at all. Of course, “not as solid” and “let’s see them win SBO like that lolinternet”, but saying they’re only good because they have good supers is pretty silly.

Oh wait, I mean …

You know this. Stop clutching at straws.

187

Absolutely. It doesn’t mean that at all. But its still greatly reduced and there is nothing else in the game that replaces it. Is this a bad thing? Matter of personal taste. Also that video gets posted in every 3S thread x_x

Not anyone of course, just the people who continuously claim the game is the deepest fighter of all time, or close to it. Its a mixup, “mind-reading” RPS w/e you want to call it game. That can be exciting to play and watch depending on your tastes but that certainly doesn’t give it great depth. Bear in mind however that I didn’t actually say anything specific about 3S outside referencing Azrael’s post so I don’t know where your claim is coming from.

If people have something good to say about 3S they are welcome to, just pick the things that are actually good about it. If someone said he thinks ST is retarded because of option-select 0f throws, walldives, throw loops, 1f reversal window or O. Sagat I’d respect his opinion even if I disagreed.

188

Yeah, that video is still pretty impressive to me because I’d ruled fireball pressure out of the game until I saw it. It still isn’t a big part of the game by any means, but it’s possible.

And I agree, a lot of people replace “mix up” with “deep” when talking about 3s. Personally, I’d avoid throwing “deep” around altogether, because there’s no solid definition for it. Does deep mean lots of options (GG is deep), does it mean lots of mix-up (3S is deep), does it mean tactics and control of space (ST is deep)? Even those descriptions are all drastic generalizations of the games and don’t in any way cover all of what makes them tick. Deep is really just some term used to say “my favorite game is better than your favorite game, and the specific reasons I like mine are now tagged as “depth.””

189

sigh

Of course I know this, because that isn’t what I said.

Whatever, I’m out.

190

I think, whenever the SF3 vs OG style argument comes up, a lot of people on BOTH sides have no idea what they’re talking about. But I don’t really understand why there has to be an argument at all. Its almost silly to compare 3S to ST or even SFIV because the play styles are so different. So then whichever you prefer comes down to preference, and in preference there is no right or wrong answer. We should just be happy that there are games with different playstyles to cater to different tastes and not get all worked up when someone likes something different. In a perfect world, anyway.

Because 3S is so different, I would not want to see 3S characters in SFIV or even SFV 17 years from now. I think Capcom should give it the Alpha treatment - make it its own spinoff series. Keep parry and super arts, take out Ryu, Ken, Chun, and Akuma, add new characters, and perhaps bring in characters from other Capcom franchises (that make sense…nothing like Mega Man). With SFIV having done fairly well, Capcom may be more receptive to making new fighters than they were two years ago, and they are always saying to make your voice heard and all that.

Its not guaranteed or perfect…but its still a very powerful tool that has to be respected. This alone will change the dynamic of a match.

Let’s say we’re playing a non-parry game. I’m using a fireball character - I’ve pushed you into a corner and I’m standing at a particular point. Here, I can make your life miserable. If you do nothing, I chip you to death with fireballs, or maybe an overhead or throw. If you jump, I will AA you. If you poke, you risk running into a fireball or something else. You are definitely at the tactical disadvantage here. The situation is not completely hopeless though. You may be able to get out of the corner, but that will depend on a number of things specific to your character and the matchup. If you can read my attack patterns, you can try a reversal. If it hits, you get out of the corner. However, if you whiff or I block, I now get to punish you for free. Its a very high risk-low reward scenario, but you are at the tactical disadvantage so that’s the reward I get for putting you there.

Now lets make it a parry game. Now, it really doesn’t matter how many fireballs I throw at you, you can just tap them away and we’re back at square one. But ok, you’re still in the corner. You still have the high risk-low reward defensive options that you did in the non-parry game, but now you have parry as well. Parry is substantially less risky, and offers a far greater reward. If you try a reversal and I do nothing, I now get to punish you for free. But if you try to parry and I do nothing…nothing happens. Its completely safe in that scenario, whereas the reversal comes with a very high degree of risk.

Plus, now you can actually jump at me. If I AA and you parry, you get to punish me now. If I don’t AA, maybe you can start to apply pressure, push me backwards or even find a way to jump over me and turn the tables.

So now, I have to respect this defensive option that you have. If I give you something you can parry, the one who ends up taking big damage will be me. So I’ve got to attack you in a way that you’re not expecting me to so that you can’t react to it. And this isn’t really all that different from us being at midscreen. Having you in the corner doesn’t really put you at a tactical disadvantage, especially since you have a good way to get out, or even turn the tables on me. You just can’t move backwards, that’s all. Its not even that I expect you to parry everything, or that its a magical “get out of jail free” card, but I’m forced to respect the fact that it’s an option available to you, and that alone changes the dynamic of the situation.

So this takes away the idea of tactical advantage, and makes 3S a game where anything can happen. And there are people who like that, and there are people who like the idea of gaining the upper hand and having that lead to victory, or having to carefully think and plan your way out of a bad situation, or trying hard not to get put there in the first place. Again, that’s all just personal preference.

191

I enjoyed 3s, not sure where the hate is. All the SF games are great…takes diff skills to play :slight_smile:

I am wrong, the EX SF games were ass… :wink:

192

I find it hilarious when people put down EX and yet say they like “everyother SF”, when aside from its own gameplay mechanics added in, it plays just like any other SF on a basic level. And BTW, the same people that made SF2 made EX. Food for thought.

About third strike, I can respect the game, its simply not my cup of tea most of the time. For some odd reason, I like Second Impact more. I’d take any of them over SF4, though.

193

:bluu::nono: They were okay. Just not on the other games level except EX2…that was good. very good. And those ex games weren’t a bad attempt to try to venture off into something different.

194

making sure more people see this

195

Again, I think you mostly have the right of it.

The corner is still the worst spot to be in, but it isn’t as drastic as ST. Or not in the same way. Offensively, keeping someone in the corner is tough, because, as you mentioned, they have more options for getting out. But where it isn’t as sure fire keeping them there, and holding them there for any significant amount of time is less likely, something to remember about the 3S corner game is how drastically corners change combos. A lot of characters can juggle far, far more if they connect in the corner. So while you aren’t held there as easily, one mistake made with your back to the wall can result in a combo that’ll eat half your life. Parrying in the corner is real risky.

An example match: [media=youtube]cZ-6kz5LyiI[/media]

Urien and Necro both have their midscreen strengths as well, but they’re combo/damage options are drastically improve once you get them in the corner. That entire match is them swapping beatings in the corner.

But yes, being in the corner can be flipped with one correct parry. So getting them there is more like a set-up than a tactical position. But it really changes the risk/reward scenario quite a bit.

196

I understand and appreciate ST just fine, but it seems to me that fireball fights are largely a game of chicken in which both players just keep throwing the fireballs while waiting for the other to do something. 3s’s parry system eliminates this. It basically says, “Get to the fighting because you can’t just stand here throwing fire all day.” You have to be craftier with the fireballs in 3s, use them in combos, setups, etc. You can’t just toss them inadvertently hoping something will happen (not saying you can do this in ST, mind you) because of the parrying game and also because they don’t do tons of damage.

Of course ST is a faster game. It’s TURBO! That should go without saying. As for the turtling, it all depends on the character you pick. I see fireball fighting as a form of turtling depending on how it’s used. All you have to do is hit qcf+p and you’re good to go. That’s not easy? In my own experience, it’s much easier to turtle in the SF2 games because projectiles are emphasized so much.

3s is a game with a different emphasis, something which some old school players seem to not be able to grasp (not saying this is you.) I’m an old school player too, but I learned to evolve with the games. If other people can’t, don’t blame the game because it doesn’t cater to how you play. And we get ST fans in here boiling 3s down to “parry>win” which is about as correct as saying ST=throw fireball>win. I love both games, but the emphasis in them is vastly different. You can’t play one like the other and to expect to be able to is just plain lazy. There will always be ST fans who don’t understand how to play 3s and vice versa. Just play what you dig and leave it at that. Don’t shit on folks who don’t get a big rubbery one over your game of choice. (and fallot, this last paragraph is in general, also, not necessarily aimed at you)

197

Nope.

198

3s is what got me back in to fighters seriously but I will say ST overall is the better game. Parrying is fun as hell and I still love that game but as said before, in ST when you fuck up it’s your ass and it is very fast paced. I see where ST heads don’t like 3s but I do see where it is a great game and should have recognition. I love the idea above about a 3 series game where you can do NG and 2I characters. Also, it is sooo not easy to turtle in ST when you see your opening or get impatient and just want to go in. Coming from playing 3s ST was hard to appreciate at a competitive level at first for me because it was frustrating since I couldn’t blast through a fireball spam with proper parry timing (which I was still trying to do for a bit) but that game is just solid once you get the feel and teaches fundamentals that can go to most games.
Oh, and Ken’s SAI is just a harder to use right and larger barred SA3 for the most part. Not useless but no question the 2nd best choice

In tech romancer’s defense the EX series wasn’t ass, just waaaayyy too different for it’s time and went very unappreciated. I don’t love em to death but can’t hate em either

199

Sure, because your assessment is the only right one. :rolleyes:

200

Really? I hear most people actually like EX2 the least because of its emphasis on excel combos sometimes. My favorite is actually the first EX, but they are all quality games.

Also, about third strike, I thought I heard somewhere that SFIII was supposed to be the true sequel and continuation of the series from SF2, as opposed to the alpha series. Can anyone confirm this?