I miss Adon, but fuck that game. 
The basic way I see sf5 and sf4:
Sf4 is based around fundamentals and poking, doesn’t require great reads, does require great strategy, does require great execution timing and lab. Players better than you are easier to beat or take games off of because of vortex, players weaker than you are easier to take sets off of because your vortex/fundamentals/execution are better and over the course of a set your numbers will simply win out.
Sf5 is based on reads and reactions. Doesn’t require high end fundamentals outside of reactive fundamentals, no super strict or hard timing to be seen out side of a handful of characters, very pick up and play. Hard to take games or beat players better than you depending on your style, easy to lose games to players weaker than you, once again, depending on your style. Anti fireball moves are both weaker and stronger than sf4. Weaker in that most require you to be closer to use, weaker in that they tend to have startup before projectile invincibility. Stronger in that they tend to not require meter.
This means with good reactions you can negate a decent fireball game, better than you could in 4, meaning at “high level” fireballs are poop. But at lower levels they are still really good where people can’t easily use 7 frame projectile startup v skills to blow through them for free.
Sf5 doesn’t usually require good or great strategy to win at. Just keep doing the same shit but at different ranges and with different timings.
Sf5 is harder to autopilot in. Sf4 is easier to autopilot in.
Sf5 neutral is harder to defend in, upclose is easier to defend in.
I personally think sf5 rewards reactions and reads, sf4 rewards spacing,timing, and strategy.
Though neither of these things are mutually exclusive. Parts of both games can be found in the other… since they are still streetfighter, however the emphasis on certain types of gameplay are vastly different.
3 Likes
sf4 has honda and t hawk
sfv does not
thats the main reason why everyone says sfv is bad, it is known
8 Likes
I still fundamentally like SFV more.
I always felt I was fighting the connection and 50 layers of OSes in 4, moreso than the actual person I was playing.
Two of the many problems that I and others had with sf4. Though one was easily negates by not playing online and just going to locals since there were lots of locals around at that time.
Sf4 online was booty as shit. Not playable for me.
I played sim in SF4 until rose dropped, and while I hated vortexs and Os’s that where being Os’d… I still had more fun playing that casually or competitively then I have every had playing sf5.
SF4 is a multi-system multi-release game. Those numbers are inflated to a great extent as players had to continually repurchase the game.
SF5 has shipped 3.1 million copies as of March of this year, and has only ever been released on a single system. This also does not take into account the massive amounts of DLC purchases.
SF5 by the end of its run will be the clear winner of the two in terms of unique sales and most likely profit. I would go as far as wagering that SF5 will likely be the most profitable SF era since SF2 when you factor all the other income streams that it generates alongside the game and DLC sales.
7 Likes
This game can be played all day. Sf5 came into a community that was already primed for a streetfighter game coming from sf4’s buildup.
Whereas sf4 came into a largely stagnant and dying scene.
It’s like comparing the end of the depression to the beginning of the 50’s
1 Like
You can argue that SF4 benefited from the dark age and nostalgia factor.
SF5 not only had to compete with its virile predecessor, it also took a great risk by venturing into completely new territory for the franchise. A lot of mistakes were made but a lot of improvement from the experience also. The old model had to die, and SF5 had to take one for the team. Looking back, it’s amazing how far along the game came.
Look at the metacritic critics scores of MK11 (SF’s arch nemesis) and SF5AE for example. SF5 is supreme.
5 Likes
If I lock you all up in a room for a month with nothing to play but smash, maybe you guys will finally concede that sf 5 is the best game ever. Lol
2 Likes
I don’t think that’s gonna turn out the way you think it will.
2 Likes
It’s not the best game ever. But honestly, I say this with the least amount of shill possible - In its current state I think it is remains a very viable and competitive offering for any casual who is interested in playing FIGHTING games. I think once SSF5 or the inevitable definitive cross-generational cross-platform version of the game is released - that version of SF5 is a legit candidate for one of the best fighting games of the 21st century.
1 Like
And how many of us here bought the subsequent versions? If Capcom pulled a MS RROD scam, they’d count every version of SFV that updated to AE as a “new” sale.
MS did not count replacement boxes as sales.
However, if someone opted to buy a brand new box rather than take the free replacement, then that was a sale.
Also, Microsoft hasn’t actually reported units sold in a long time, the prefer the MAU meteric.
I dont know how big the retention rate was going to be for SF5 even if the game had been great. What is evident is that a lot of the people grinned and beared Saf4 werent willing to do it a 2nd time for SF5.
You could feasibly do a survey about it. Then use some of the Social Science software to break down the data. If you want some answers, that would be one steps towards getting some answers
You can definitely make that argument. But it’s like making the argument that walking down your block twice a day is what contributed to your mr Olympia win where your calves were cited as your best overall bodypart…
Volume and intensity matters here. When comparing nostalgia versus raw numbers there really isn’t much of a comparison. Sf4 had nostalgia factor and a pitifully small actual playerbase. Sf5 had a HUGE playerbase from sf4.
This is like using dbfz’s nostalgia to factor in its success or lack theorof. It really at the end of the day, while not entirely negligible, doesn’t mean much.
Here’s a great example. Lots of artists albums do well the first time they are released if they are good… but it’s inevitably the SECOND album that does really well if the FIRST album was decent, even if the second album isn’t as good as the first.
Now take “album” and turn it into “movie” “game” “comedy special” etc and this trend holds tru that the predecessor is basically advertisement for the successor.
It may hold for sf3>sf4… but not much because sf3 itself was a commercial flop and not many people were actually playing that game as compared t9 the eventual numbers sf4 made.
SF4 was the return of an iconic brand after 10 years, the hype was through the roof
That’s… really not a fair comparison. Almost 8 million are IV’s lifetime sales over the course of a decade. SFV hasn’t been out for even half of that, plus it’s available on less platforms, plus it doesn’t get yearly disc releases
Also are we really going to gauge popularity via sales numbers? Cuz NRS games break their own records like every time yet the playerbase dies out within weeks
3 Likes
3 Likes
My mistake. Sorry dude. I am going to need an accurate analogy.