It’s true, if you look at most of the games that get attention in tourneys and here, there 2D games that are a decade old. It’s not uncommon to see someone dump on a 3D game for merely being 3D, and 3D games by virtue of not having to draw something frame by frame will have smoother animation. I mean up until 3S 2D fighters merely mirrored sprites, if someone jumped over your head, you “popped” facing the correct direction, which could be seen as jerky, as opposed to a character actually “turning around.”
So I think it’s accurate. Whether or not it’s really a problem is another discussion altogether.
Maj
7
Actually the very first SF2 game (and every game since) had turning around animations. Fuck that guy for calling us a cult. Video game historians aren’t exactly big in the mainstream either.
The_V
8
Part of Poole’s quote is simply making the point that he observes that there are two types of games under the category called fighting games. One of his type uses “three-dimensional, solid-looking characters” and the group does not but instead uses “flat-plane, comic-book style with characteristically jerky animation.”
Perhaps he didn’t want to just say there are fighting games in 3-D and 2-D because he wanted more precise criteria. His criteria, however, are fairly vague (solid-looking?) and are based on appearance only, so it is unclear where to place games like the Street Fighter EX series which does not avoid using 3-D characters but is on played on a single plane. I don’t think comic-book style and animation quality are useful qualities for catergoriztion because stlye has more to do with how a designer wants a game to look and animation quality is a function of manpower, talent, and technology.
I think we can all agree that 2-D fighters are different from 3-D fighters but we don’t define them with Poole’s criterion.
Poole’s other point that all SF has left us is a small fringe category that has a few followers (his “cult”) is not the right way to view SF’s legacy. SF had a profound impact on the look and design of fighting games in every respectable fighter today – The double energy bar with time, the win-lose-draw indicators, picture endings, synonyms for “perfect” or “round” used in various fighters, frame data and so on.
Finally, I think the use of the word “cult” is a poor one. I think he means to suggest that there is a small fan base for 2-D fighters, which is true, but the word connotates that these fans are somehow hidden and exclusive to 2-D which is clearly not the case, as many people enjoy both types of fighters.
Jerky animation, eh? I’m not sure I’d use that adjective to describe the animation in the III series, which is nearly 10 years old now. Or MOTW, for that matter, which has been around for a long time as well.
Does this guy even know what he’s talking about?
pherai
10
like any true video game expert, he knows only what hes seen screenshots of 
oh, and probably a thing or two about halo
To this day i still get ALOT more enjoyment out of a quality 2D fighter than a 3D one. Sure games like Tekken 5 or SC2 are cool, but i can always go back to an oldie like SFApha2 or MSH, and get the same if not MORE enjoyment out of it.
Plus i love the look of such 2D games. Much prettier and easier on the eyes as well.
Realism is not always a good thing people…
But then i’m 25 and probabley could be regarded as an “Old-school gamer”, by all the young’en gamers out there who don’t care for 2D.
Henaki
13
You’re as close minded as him.
gouki10
14
i would like to read the whole articale and see what else he says on this matter, cause that sentence is his opinion on the matter.
However, 2d games have continued to be the most dominat scene of fighting games so i really can’t say that by majority he is right, cause he’s not.
oh well like i said the whole articale would be nice to read.
It’s just like music or anything else…
The majority of Queen fans were around when the band was making new records. There are some fans out there that were born long after the group dis-banded. the majority of 2d fighting game fans were around when they were fresh. That’s what they’re used to and what they have become familiar with over the years. It’s prefrence. there is no right or wrong.
BTW, fuck that guy. There’s no WAY he kniows what he’s talking about. where is this article? Is it online anywhere?
He sounds very closed minded (one dimentional) and if he took his head out of his Sphincter, and actually looked or watched games like 3S, Martial Masters, LB2, MOTW, Shodown 3, GA-TD, Night Warriors etc…or a game like The Ninja Warriors (which was made in 87) in motion, he’d see that these games are a far cry from “Jerky Animation” as he says! And when these games were being created, gameplay/mechanics and theme were the companies 1st priorities when they designed them, and everything else like the control to the animation and music were 2nd?
Just my 2 cents on this subject…
EDIT: http://arcadepub.com/book/?gcoi=55970100070370&fa=formatinfo&format_id=2
I agree with him. If you only play SF2 and never moved beyond that then you are part of a subculture, in North America. So are a lot of other people too. People into jazz, people into astronomy, people into that stinky asian drink. There are alot of things we as individuals like that aren’t mainstream. I don’t think he is close minded. He is just looking at things from an outsiders point of view. Most everyone with an outsiders point of view would feel that way… anyways. How do I react to the quote? If someone told me point blank in a conversation?
" Yeah, street fighter is pretty underground a geeky in north america. I think a big part of making friends with anyone is having something in common. The best friends I’ve ever made, I’ve made through street fighter and other fighting games.You can meet lots of good folks that way. I’ll always play . "
Debaser
18
But that’s just it. I don’t think he can make those kinds of assumptions on things he’s probably never tried before. I doubt he’s ever played 3rd strike or Garou so I don’t think he can say the whole 2d fighting game pantheon has jerky animation.
Well… I think we all know it would be easy to play devil’s advocate in the issue of jerky looking animations.
Tekken is 60 frames a second.
Debaser
20
Far too easy. But I think if you want to be a bonafide historian on any subject, you have to be non-biased.
Tekken is fun.
I always read newspaper articles about video games. They are so off base that it’s almost funny. I think that it is a good lesson to learn, if something like video game information can be so easy to mess up in newsprint, what about things like war? Politics? and things that matter… so yeah. Take everything with a grain of salt.
Cheers for the comments, interesting reading/reactions.
TBH, that is pretty much all he says about the subject. I found it very interesting how alot of these types of books make brief reference to SF, but tend to focus on the MK games and their effect on society at the time.
lol @ Pherai- one book I read claimed that Nintendo made Street Fighter 2 and that MK1 had no female fighters. My lecturer (who has written several books on games and sci-fi films) didnt realise that Prince of Persia was an old franchise when she brought it up in a seminar.
Writing an academic book about video games pretty much screams “Killing time until I get my master’s”.
Writing a book+getting paid=better than typing on a forum for free
Also, Im pretty sure shes got a phd already :wgrin:
A Ph.D. in what, dueling?
