I love the amount of fucktards that have posted in this shit.
IMO, if Third Strike didn’t have horrible balance (i.e. tiers) the game wouldn’t be hated as much.
then why is marvel liked? your logic fails.
EDIT:
This is what I’m referring to…
Yun, Ken, Chun, Yang, Makoto, Dudley, Urien, Ryu, Akuma are generally competitive characters
that’s 9 characters…
Elena, Alex, Remy, Ibuki, Oro, Necro are moderately competitive
that’s 6 characters…
Hugo and Q are SOMEWHAT competitive, but need a lot of work
that’s two characters…
twelve and sean are somewhat playable, but very difficult to even get in the top half, so they’re not that great… that’s the last two characters
9/19 are REALLY FUCKING GOOD… that’s about half the cast buddy…
MvC2 is like 7 / 56?
GTFO.
even with that, the people would find other reasons to hate it 
Well, as I said before it was just my vanilla opinion and I’ve never played Marvel… so I really can’t argue with you.
Congrats on being ignorant then. How could you make an argument based on 3S’s balance? It’s much more balanced than most of the Guilty Gear games, most of the Vs. Games, most of the 3D games, etc. I think the only games more balanced are ST and Vampire Savior? i don’t know…
Mixah speaks the truth. And even with Marvel having terrible balance issues, it’s still fun to play. The only game I feel that has worked on its balance with each iteration is Guilty Gear, although this game isn’t as accepted at SRK.
GG is better balanced any day, the best balanced of the fgs?, thats another story, i guess that vf is the one that holds that title so far
Jesus, why the neg rep man? I jsut stated my opinion. TO ME TS is unbalanced because 9/19 isn’t good enough for me.
I believe what capcom wanted to do was to reinvent the series to appeal to a new crowd. They knew that most of the returning fans were still holding some of the previous knowledge so they included advanced tactics such as parrying.
Also with every reiteration you’re going to alienate SOMEONE. As in some of sf3’s testing phases there was no ken and no ryu; there was only sean. People complained and they got what they wanted.
Story wise they include a story just to help develop a character so they have depth and personality. i mean, imagine if sf2 was just fighting with no story. May have a mass appeal or not. Imo, i think as crazy as sf2’s story was i liked it. sf3’s story was even crazier but i think they just wanted to one-up sf2’s. But still im kinda tired with the whole evil organization hold fighting tourney story.
anyways 3s didn’t have any mistakes in my opinion. the only mistake being made with 3s in mind is people not giving it a solid try. great game that will give you great matches. All you should need/want in a FG
p.s. i was gonna shit on this thread, but i decided to be nice.
As much as I don’t like 3S, he’s right and your wrong. You need to look up what opinions and facts are, and rethink your argument.
If you have a brand new game with 20 brand new character sprites and backgrounds, but 1 bonus character still uses an old sprite are you honestly going to say the game isn’t “from scratch”?
If so, your original use of the term “from scratch” is meaningless.
CvS series. Out of some 40+ characters, 14 are old sprites.
If it makes you feel better, pretend like that minority isn’t in the game. And, you have like 25 or 30 brand new sprites. Not to mention the new backgrounds and music. More than enough to qualify as a new 2D game.
Sorry, but you cannot argue that CvS was a budget job or a rehash. It was a bonafide new 2D fighting game series, and yes it came after SF3.
Last gasp? 3S was no last gasp. The game introduced 5 more hyper-animated characters, additional animations for existing characters, all new stages, a brand new ambitious soundtrack, and new endings. That’s a really large investment for a “failing” franchise…
I repeat: if the first 2 versions of SF3 were such abysmal failures, why would they spend that kind of time and money on a third (knowing in advance that most current consoles could not handle a port)?
2 years passed between SI and 3S. That’s more than enough time to see which way the wind is blowing.
It makes no sense unless
a) their intended timeline for this game was longer than we think (at the very least 3 years…maybe 4-5 since 3S was finally ported in 2000)
and/or
b) the game was doing well enough for their tastes.
Out of all the ports you mentioned, how many systems could have actually handled SF3? I think the systems that could handle it were generally the systems that got it. DC, PS2, X-box.
How do you figure that? Just because it uses some Alpha sprites? What other sprites could they have used instead…ST’s?
What’s P groove about, then? Why do Ryu and Ken have SF3 moves? Why does Chun Li look more like her SF3 version than her Alpha version? What about Yun?
I’d argue that CvS is just as SF3-like as it is Alpha-like.
Classy. Close the thread AFTER your response.
Everybody wants to be an arm-chair mod…
14 old sprites? Augh… this is gonna bug me all day if I don’t figure out all of them…
The 12 world warriors, minus Ryu, Ken and Bison (Dictator), right? That’s 9… Then, Dan, Sakura, Rolento, Morrigan, and Cammy?
Sorry for off-topic.
Crap, forgot about Bison. Make that 13 old sprites.
Don’t forget Chun Li was redone, too.
Wow, they did a lot of work on CvS2…
I don’t play 3rd Strike…I just didn’t agree with the reasons the dude used to say he didn’t like it.
It amounts to 3s people bashing ST and saying its all fireball spamming.
P.S- I guess I should’ve explained myself instead of just saying Wrong…but I was tired, sorry. 
P.S.S- I’m trying to play SS…hence my av.
Nerd…man the rumors about SRK are true…
Because with the CVS series, Capcom was ALL about getting their most recent characters, as well as the most recent versions of their own older characters to go up against the outdated/altered versions of SNK’s fighters.
rexyaresexy:
> As in some of sf3’s testing phases there was no ken and no ryu; there was only sean. People complained and they got what they wanted.
GOD. NO. THIS NEVER HAPPENED. Absolutely 100% false. There was never any beta that never had Ryu and Ken, it is a complete myth and I’m fed up of this falsehood being perpetuated. Ryu and Ken were there from the beginning. >:|
Also, LOL at people who think that Capcom actually intended parrying to be an “advance tactic”.
And originally, for all intents and purposes, SF2 didn’t have a story.
Lone Retard:
> If you have a brand new game with 20 brand new character sprites and backgrounds, but 1 bonus character still uses an old sprite are you honestly going to say the game isn’t “from scratch”?
Eighteen sprites actually (counting Ken/Ryu/Akuma/Evil Ryu as one). CvS1 was a very impressive first time effort in terms of artwork, yes (though I remember hearing on snk-capcom that they had help from SNK artists on that one; never did get a confirmation on that). Regardless, it was a crossover that still had nearly 50% recycled sprites.
They also did a lot of work on CvS2, yes. It was still not a NEW game. Capcom was still willing to put effort into 2D fighters up until CvS2 (despite being a massive C&P job, MvC2 was also a big effort as it had 10 brand new sprites and backgrounds) - they just were not going to put that effort to a completely new project.
> I repeat: if the first 2 versions of SF3 were such abysmal failures, why would they spend that kind of time and money on a third (knowing in advance that most current consoles could not handle a port)?
Compared to how much they spent on the first iteration, the money spent on 2I and 3S was chump change (2I especially, since that was really just the finished version of NG). NG was the real bomb. The rest were just failures on top of NG’s colossal blackhole of suck. Not necessarily their fault per se, but it’s still a fact that the entire series took years to make back what it cost. Had it been anything BUT Street Fighter 3, which I imagine they would have been loathe to give up on, they probably would have pulled the plug after the second game. Despite your hilarious apologising and bullshit logic, the series was a failure from a financial standpoint, and all but cost us a new proper SF game for nearly 10 years.
> Out of all the ports you mentioned, how many systems could have actually handled SF3?
This is actually irrelevant. THe SNES could barely handle SF2. The PSX couldn’t handle CPSII games properly. Even the Saturn need a hardware addon to do CPSII games justice. That didn’t stop them from releasing games on those systems (and in the case of SFA3 at least, selling well on them). And if 3S was in such high demand, it sure didn’t move any DC systems like, say, SF2 moved SNES systems. And finally, if it was matter of people waiting to play SF3 on a proper system that people actually owned, why didn’t Capcom bother to have a version of SF3 ready to go for PS2 launch? Why wait until 2004, four years after the DC port, to release such a supposedly high demand game?
@ Ultima
Damn…you know a lot about Capcom.
Did you use to work for them or something?
Just wondering…
do we need to go over this every 4 months?
some people like 3s. some don’t.
i wish this topic was banned.
:d: clever 
do we need to go over this every 3s thread?
the game is empirically bad
i wish this topic was banned