Was 3rd Strike a mistake? Did Capcom go too far ahead of themselves?

The_Lone_Dragon · January 31, 2009, 7:15am

Oh, I agree. There’s no way any SF related game could have made as much of an impact in 97 as SF4 is making now (or as SF2 made in the beginning). But, I think a little bit more of a heads up would have helped people cope with the new direction.

The gap between 2 and 3 was a flood of Capcom fighting games. The gap between 3 and 4 was a drought.

That’s precisely why I question how high Capcom’s expectations were for SF3. Yes, it was called “Street Fighter THREE”, but as you point out, it was basically a new franchise (by design, according to the interview you linked) released in the midst of many other new fighting games.

People joke about it all the time, but maybe you’re on to something…maybe Capcom really did just tack on the title and add Ryu/Ken in an attempt to get people to try out a brand new franchise.

Right. But, none of this stuff was exactly a secret. Capcom probably knew of all these disadvantages from the get go…the saturated FG market, the lack of fan favorites, the hardware that couldn’t be ported to current systems, etc.

Knowing all this, I just don’t see how they could expect the game to be an overnight hit.

Incidentally, I always found it weird that when they had a chance to correct one of their supposed criticisms (i.e. the foreign roster), they only brought back one classic, Chun Li. Instead of Makoto, Q, Twelve, and Remy, why not Guile, Sagat, Sakura, and Cammy? If the game were failing their expectations so horribly at the time, this would have been an easy fix…

Inverse · January 31, 2009, 7:26am

I just can’t wait for Third Strike to be released on Live or PSN. That would be incredible.

I don’t think it was a waste at all. It was an attempt at bringing the game to it’s roots and to me, is still one of the most beautifully drawn 2d games ever made. Even more so that Guilty Gear. The GG games and even BlazBlue are very floaty in their animation, despite how slick they are.

SF3 looked natural, FELT natural. Everyone who has played SF3 can agree that the moves feel organic from the moment you push the button and the move hits your target. It’s meaty, powerful and satisfying. I love SF3 and can’t imagine the last 15 years of gaming without it.

Shinkuu_Tatsumaki · January 31, 2009, 7:27am

^^ SF3 was an attempt to bring it back to the roots? Are you serious?

Inverse · January 31, 2009, 7:29am

At the time. Yes. A lot of the fighting games at the time were infatuated with the concept of hyper fighting. Turbo this. Super Jumps. Super aerial combos! Super 56 ultra hit finishers! Endless eternal combos! Laser beams! Pew Pew! One hit punches! Even KoF was guilty of this.

SF3 brought back a slower paced, more strategic and calculated gameplay more reminiscent of Super Street Fighter 2: Turbo. If new games brought a hyper edition of SF3, so be it, but SF3 was an attempt at bring back the more solid, roundhouse kick in the face style of Street Fighter.

That’s how I remember it. Square in the middle of all the VS games, where people looked at SF3 like “How do I do air combos?”

System_1 · January 31, 2009, 7:32am

I am calling BS.

Mixah · January 31, 2009, 8:17am

pretty much… i vote this thread diie

Sirlin_Snake_Shirt · January 31, 2009, 8:42am

your dumb

Dime · January 31, 2009, 8:48am

i was gonna call bs at his back to roots statement… but hes quite right actually… one of the HEAVY marketing themes when sf3 came out was that it was a back to the roots type of gameplay. they pointed at no air blocking as one of the MAJOR back to roots differences at the time. also one super was reminiscent of ST at the time, and they (capcom) pointed that out as well.

they were trying to separate the franchise from the alpha and versus series…

as has been pointed out they failed pretty hard at making the game less execution heavy. same as SF4 is shaping out to be as stuff gets more and more advanced…

-dime

System_1 · January 31, 2009, 8:52am

Ok, fair enough they marketed that shit as SF2:2, but that is in no way how it was made. SF3 is nothing like it. I mean not at all.

BEWD · January 31, 2009, 9:16am

Sirlin_Snake_Shirt · January 31, 2009, 10:35am

way to not ‘get’ my posting style

Inverse · January 31, 2009, 1:53pm

LoL, sorry you feel that way.

But look, obviously the game ISN’T Street Fighter 2, it was Street Fighter 3. It was the third game of a very highly regarded franchise. Like I pointed out at the time, after Street Fighter II: Championship Edition we came into the Turbo era.

With the Alpha series coming out back then, Xmen: Children of the Atom and all the other Marvel games and the birth of the VS series can you honestly show me another game that had minimal air combos, slow tactical based combat, no air blocking and a heavier focus on single, normal attacks and less on frantic combos at the time?

I don’t know about you, but if you were in the arcades back then you know Fighting games were going off in a different direction. Even Guilty Gear X was out then and it was a fast based, deep game, with lots of frantic based elements.

The Round 1, Fight! Gameplay that many people loved about Street Fighter II was lost. Many people never touched an arcade stick again after SSF2:T. The producers of SF4 have been saying that this is their attempt at getting back that generation. From what I saw back then SF3 was the first attempt to do the same. It had those elements that “grounded” Street Fighter back into the realm of 1 on 1, heavy hitting fights.

Sure it messed up by introducing new characters few associated with, quirky elements and yes… a slower paced gameplay most fighting game players back then simply felt was “antiquated” in comparison to their beloved Marvel vs Capcom 2. The slowest they would ever want it was Capcom vs SNK gameplay. Even that was considered lethargic by the community back then, but it was welcomed due to it’s amazing dream matches and awesome character list.

SF3 had potential, and I’m not saying it’s exactly the same as SF2. That’d be ridiculous. It’s a successor, a sequel and in my opinion if they would have simply redrawn, updated and brought back the SF2 staples from Championship (The Original 8+4), I think it would have been more widely accepted into the arms of arcade goers. I think most people were just glad they had the smarts to keep Chun-li and the original 2 Shoto’s in there. But it should have had more. (Remy is no Guile, though he can try all he wants. )

System_1 · January 31, 2009, 2:11pm

totally

arstal · January 31, 2009, 3:11pm

Samsho.

123-Genei-Jin · January 31, 2009, 3:16pm

…and FFS, World Heroes (don’t even recall if it was 2 jet or perfect was available already), Fighters History Dynamite, VF2

Inverse · January 31, 2009, 3:32pm

Sighs Oh yes, Samsho.

By then Samsho 4 was already well established, but yes, it still was in the Arcades ripping it up. (Even then, Samsho 4 tried to blend in with the turbo crowd with that weird combo system. It infected everyone… lol)

…but touche’ good sir.

arstal · January 31, 2009, 3:53pm

Yeah, Samsho 4 did, but around the time 3S was out people didn’t really abuse the crazy CD combo stuff too much. That came later.

KOF98 had limited airblocking (not on forward jumps), and was faster then SF, but it wasn’t spastic (later KOFs were) and didn’t have the stupid stuff. Combos were mostly close normal/maybe command normal/super, so nothing too nuts.

The_Lone_Dragon · January 31, 2009, 8:57pm

While I agree with most of the other things you said about SF3, the effectiveness of the “heavy hitting” art style, SF3’s change of direction, and it’s attempt to defy the hectic pace of other current games…

I’m really not so sure it would have done that much better if they simply redrew all the old school characters. After all, Alpha 3 was already that game. Plus, the hardware issue would have still prevented the game from being played by many audiences (no console releease + plus expensive arcade cabinets = limited audience)

Anyways, I think it’s pretty clear that Capcom didn’t want to bring the SF2 characters into SF3. They had plenty of chances to, but refused. I just think the goal of this game was different to them.

System_1 · January 31, 2009, 9:43pm

the lone dragon:

is your game of choice 3s?
was it your first fighting game?
how do you feel about the mechanics of the game in a competitive environment?

The_Lone_Dragon · January 31, 2009, 10:02pm

My first fighting game was Karate Champ for NES like 20 years ago, I suppose.

Next was SF2 arcade, though SF2:HCE for Genesis was the first SF I played religiously.

So, to answer the unasked question: no, some guy I don’t know named Daigo has nothing to do with my interest in fighting games, let alone SF3.

My game of choice from a competitive standpoint would probably be SC1 or a Genesis based SF game (or the black sheep SC3, because that YunSung is my favorite YunSung ever).

My personal favorite would probably be SF3, though I own/play any FG I can get me hands on.

As far as the “play mechanics” go, like Azrael, I’m not going to get into that here. The ST vs 3S war has never really interested me, since I like both. I guess you could sum up my view as “different strokes for different folks”.