https://twitter.com/StreetFighter/status/1348645845298601989
3 Likes
No, but Nintendo is. Aside from more recently known franchises like Fire Emblem, Xenogears, etcetera, Nintendo is generally never seen as anime.
Everyone and their grandmothers have known and played Mario and Zelda from the very beginning; they are staples. I don’t think people would even care if Zelda goes a little more anime for the next games, but actually Zelda has always been centered much more in Western-inspired environments and mythologies, so the anime aspect is hidden a lot beter.
As for Mario and Animal Crossing, they lean much more towards a Western cartoon aesthetics than anime. If the Animal Crossing characters were human anime guys and gals, I guarantee you they would have not had the same level of success in the West.
Nintendo pretty much create their properties with an international audience in mind.
And for what Street Fighter respects, the series was absent for a long time from the collective consciousness, and Alpha and 3 were very anime, including a lot of Japanese voice acting, martial arts and shit. I think people do consider them much more anime, but not as much as the SNK games.
Rival Schools. King of Fighters. Mega Man Legends.
And lots of lots of original games Japanese developers don’t even consider localizing to the West because they simply know they won’t sell because of the anime style.
Nope. Equivalent to FIFA, I guess, because USA people prefer American Football over soccer, or so I’ve heard.
Nothing to do with visual style.
Nothing to do with visual style.
The argument was whether or not going for a visual style like Guilty Gear would be good for SF4, nothing about going for anime thematics, environment, voice acting and so on.
In the same manner, visually, KoF was more western style than street fighter before SF4, and it didn’t prevent it to fail (comparatively) at the time.
And I fail to see how Rival School is more anime style, visually, than let’s say Tekken 3 from approximately the same time period.
I don’t know Megaman Legends, but it looks like a Final Fantasy from what I’ve seen, and Final Fantasy is indeed anime looking, but a huge success in the west nonetheless.
If the argument is that going for anime thematics like high school fighters would be a bad idea, then I agree, but so far I thought we were talking about the visual layer and only that.
So Kira was right and next and last one is going to be lame af Seth, surely playing the shitty puppets
Damn, no Allen, Pullum or Darun feels so wrong
Zelda’s visual style has never been anime. They’ve always gone for a more cartoony looking. That, combined with the European influence in its aesthetics, make it feel very little Japanese.
I think they used cel-shaded for one game, but that was like extra cartoony.
Back then with Rival Schools there was no way to choose anything else than the blocky 3D graphics (if they were going for a 3D CG based game). There could have been no cel-shaded or anything.
And no, KOF was not less anime than Street Fighter. Fatal Fury and Art of Fighting were, I’d contend (especially FF3 and Real Bout).
There are plenty of examples online of what an anime Zelda might look like.
You can also search for the real cartoon that was made.
Now have a look at Zelda games, especially Breath of the Wild, as it is the one I gave you as an example.
Personally I find BotW a lot closer to the anime style, but maybe we have very different definitions of what is an anime style and what is cartoon style.
They used very heavy cell shading for one main game and two handled-console games. Those were considered very anime-like at the time, but as there is a huge variety of cartoons I’m sure you can find some of them that look like it.
I also agree that despite the cell shading it was also closer to cartoons than other Zelda because body features were very exaggerated, more than the traditional anime style.
But they also use cell-shading for Breath of the Wild, again the one I specifically mentioned because it is both extremely successful, by far the most successful one (List of best-selling Zelda games | Nintendo | Fandom) and the one that looks the more like an anime.
Then why did you list it when I asked for games that failed because they had anime-like visuals ?
I fully disagree with that, here’s a gallery with a comparison done between sprites for capcom and snk games for the same characters: Capcom vs. SNK vs. Capcom 1 out of 6 image gallery
It seems obvious to me which one is more anime-like (bigger head, bigger eyes, simplified shadows, lighter colors).
In addition, Real Bout is usually considered to be more anime-like, visually, here’s an example: http://www.hardcoregaming101.net/real-bout-fatal-fury-special/
Except what you said was “disappointment to most of it’s audience”.
<30% = “most” to you apparently?
I am. And I consider most of what came after SF2, to be improvements over SF2. Especially Alpha 3 and SF4.
Like, I hate Third Strike’s roster. But gameplaywise, it’s still a huge improvement over Super Turbo.
But also, you said “fighting games” not SF games. Which means you consider the entirety of the Dark Stalkers and Versus franchises to be “shitting the bed”. In which case just, like, fuck off dude.
Uh…when?
You described FIFA/GTA/CoD as though they were at a particular tier of “normie dude” popularity.
I’m telling you that, in America, FIFA is not in the same tier as GTA and CoD. But Madden is.
I recognized immediately, in the post after, that “most” was an exaggeration on my part.
I think it’s more than 30% but less than 50 %, I think the volume of sales is more representative that the small number of review on the website you provided, but even on your own link you can see the existence of this significant part of SF4 potential audience that was disappointed with the game.
Look at the review that gives it a note of around 7, those are reasonable notes for this game and you will find a lot of the criticism that I was talking about : people that bought SF4 for nostalgia and were disappointed to only find an equivalent of SF2 with modern graphics.
Which I fully agree, as it can be both a huge improvement on some aspects, but completely shit the bed on another.
You can point flaws in SF2 as well, but you can point them because of what came after it, on the other hand you could point flaws in all SF games that came after SF2 right at the time when they were coming out, which means it’s flaws that Capcom could have avoided.
Ok, my bad, I was essentially thinking SF + Versus, I don’t care for Dark Stalkers, it looks like a cool game but I never got into it, so I tend to forget about it, so I can’t say anything about these ones.
But for the versus I played, yes there were huge flaws.
Those numbers are not normal. There is brand fatigue, look at how pokemon sales evolve since the first releases but dividing by two the total sales from one instalment to the next is not normal.
If it was only SF5 that was impacted, it could be considered the only reason for this failure, but SSF4 was everything SF4 was, plus some more and sold poorly. SF2 turbo sold better, comparatively to SF2, than SSF4 did to SF4, and SSF4 was sold at a reduced price (and there had been SF2’ on another console in the meantime for SF2).
When a sequel succeed it is often partially due to how the previous installment was appreciated (reason why we have so much sequels in movies and games), but for the same reason, when a movie or a game succeeds for some reason, while not generating enthusiasm, the sequel will be impacted.
SF4 did create enthusiasm in the fighting game community, but it failed to gather more than that, and all sequels suffered from it.
That’s because people in general dislike that policy of rebuying the whole game to get what amounts to a season of DLC. Lots of people don’t like buying a game they already own, again.
The only ACTUAL sequel to SF4 so far has been SF5. And SF5 suffered because it DID shit the bed in a bunch of ways. Not because of this fantasy you have that people didn’t like SF4.
You can directly compare reviews of SF4 with SF5 to see why SF5 actually suffered.
So, in this thread I am learning I was apparently living a lie for the last 11 years and SF4 was not a big sucess that brought back the series from the dead (injecting life to the competitive scene at the same time while at it).
1 Like
Oh whoa. People that nostalgia-purchased Street Fighter 4 and played it DIDN’T buy every sequel to come out? Wow…wow I’m just shocked.
BTW, SF4 did so well that it warranted multiple updates & re-releases.
That is not a lack of success. That is not ‘being disliked’. It was well-regarded when it came out to an absurd degree. Enough to totally reinvigorate the fighting game market.
Saying it was anything but a resounding success is flat-out denial of reality. Judging it by the success of SF2 is absurd considering the utterly different markets.
7 Likes
This. There’s also the fact that SF4 completely refreshed the Street Fighter franchise and re-introduced the series in a contemporary age to a whole new audience which also assisted in its success, the ripples of its impact still permeate even today.
3 Likes
So…
It was reported Ono wanted some sort of “team mechanics” for SF6.
Would you have been up for it?
Do you think it would have been 2 charaters, 3 characters… 4 characters maybe?
It’s intrigiung.
Frankly, I am not interested in Team mechanics on a mainline SF release.
Well, I wouldn’t be interested either.
… but I would be curious.
It seems like Ono thing is 2-fighters teams, like he did in CFAS and SFxTK.
He hasn’t been very good with those system, though.
Maybe that’s why he got removed from SF6.
Do you think Ono was the main source of SFV’s over sexualization? I suspect that But obviously have no certainty.
1 Like
It’s impossible to know.
He was the responsable for everything Street Fighter in the last 12 years or so.
We can only wait to compare when the new guard arrives.
1 Like
Ono might have trouble working with other people like other mentioned in FG influencers.
But it doesn’t mean that the whole team SF6 that Ono is made is likely to be true.
Because those are both separate thing.
We had leaks in thr past months that litterally dig to their hard drives and put their employees in security risk. Which proves that those ain’t true.
1 Like
I belive Ono was responsonsible for the over sexualisation, the stupid humour weird/faces and the quite frankly stupid moves but he gets a pass because he revived the genre 
Now personally I believe anyone could have “revived” if they pushed for it hard enough. It had been about a decade since the last mainstream SF game and it sold mostly on nostalgia. Even people who werent into fighting games because “omg its like the old days” (except it wasnt).
On another note, anyone else KNEW akuma would be Garuda and would look totally retarded in it?