Well I only said Ryu, ken tends to deviate from normals that many of the other “shotos” actually have universally. c.LK would indeed be one of them, many of the properties are different but it’s quite clear it’s based on the tradtional c.MK. It’s pose and low profile are a close match.
He also has some normals where he is doing the same move but with a twist, typically Gouken palm strikes or chops instead of using his fist except on jumping normals and he tends to have his guard up when the others don’t(though he is sloppy now and then. Also fun is osme of his unique moves taken by Oni, making them more established shoto related than they were pre Oni.
Many shotos have different properties on shared moves even though appearance is the same. Ryu and Kens cMK don’t work the same either. For instance kens start up is faster, his active frames are MUCH less and reovery is longer and his advnatge is worse on hit and block. Combined with worse startup on his fireball makes his c.MK to hadou not even a blockstring.
But their inspiration is very much present.
That’s the issue, means many different things to people. It’s why it’s important to establish criteria. It can be as simple for someone to say, needs a DP and a Fireball, where as others would like a few more things.
It’s what makes it funny when someone says its obvious is/isn’t. To me Gouken is a shoto by design, he was inspired to be by story and has many references and nods in his normals and specials. ALl those little things make him that for me. Gouken doesn’t change in the slightest if someone says he isn’t because Gouken is still Gouken.
Well I say all that, but then again when I really dig into it I don’t even consider "shoto"a valid term :3 That ansatsuken :3 Wait a minute, does that mean Gen is a shoto? :3
I think we’ve covered this now. Everyone’s definition of it is not the same because it has not been discussed by a whole lot of people a single discussion where we achieve more-or-less a mutual agreement. Everyone’s definition varies because their premise for making the call is not the same.
If we look at it from a literary aspect comparing character design and his place in the SF universe (“design” means more than just appearance), he is more like a shoto than anything.
If we look at it from a gaming aspect, how he plays compared to Ryu, it’s not very similar.
That said, when we don’t agree to settle on the same premise before comparison, of course it’s a never-ending debate. That’s the stupid part of it all.
I don’t, personally. His specials are not only visually different, but serve almost completely different purposes from shoto specials outside of his fireballs (which are pretty different themselves).
He doesn’t even have a non-super/ultra Uppercut.
To me the only “shotos” are Ryu, Ken, Akuma, Evil Ryu, and Oni. There are other characters that are obviously variations on the shoto “template” like Sakura, Sagat, and Gouken, but they are all pretty different from for example, Akuma (who is probably who you want to make comparisons to, since he has the largest toolkit of any of the shoto characters) in one way or another.
I think Dan is a far more interesting discussion, since he has a fireball and uppercut but his “tatsu” is visually a very different, and functionally a superior tool.
Well when I look at Akuma, the backstory makes sense. They do look like brothers with the same demon flips, they both got horizontal and vertical hadoukens, and their moves are similar just that both diverged into their own style.
Akuma and Gouken are in the same cathegory, definitly. Akuma is more likely to be Ryu and Ken’s teacher though, but thats due to the fact that Gouken was introduced later into the game, I understand that…
I’ll put it like this: Gouken and Akuma are shotos, Ryu and Ken are Akumas.
One thing I wonder is why they choose to give Gouken the same character model as Oni instead, the hitbox is too damn big. Ah I get it. My man is filling the spot as Akuma and Oni’s nemesis at the same time. with no 3 frame DP. life’s tough for a nigga ;(