Wasn’t KI an obscure game? It became even less known as Rare stopped making sequels for it
Then MS came along and made it popular. Point is, a fighter can become popular over time if done right.
Killer Instinct wasn’t obscure. Sure it wasn’t Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat levels of popular. But those who bought a N64, that was the go to fighting game before Super Smash bros. Also a reboot isn’t a good example of a fighter becoming popular overtime because of the very fact it had to be rebooted. It’s not like the fighter stayed as is and gradually became popular and played more over the years.
yes some fighters arent obscure, just dormant. A new release,if done right, will generate hype among older players, who are now a significant market
weapon lord, primal rage and eternal champions certainly.
everyone rocked ki on supernintendo it was not nitch.
3rd Strike says hiiiiiiiii.
3rd strikes never been popular they just have a really vocal loud group that makes people think there a legion.
there 13 guys on ggpo afk all day. Only talk about how great the game is and even fooled capcom into wasting there time to make a remake. Just as loud small vocal crew in there basements with there crt tvs. 3s players as ultradavid Said the biggest trolls
Third Strike did see a big spike in poularity thanks to Evo Moment 37, so I’ll partialy give you that. Because that game is still a commercial failure with very few casuals fans ever getting into. Hell some where not even aware there was a Street Fighter 3 when Street Fighter 4 dropped.
KI was huge, KI2 was significantly less so; current KI is pretty damn cool.
Xrd needs to get patched soon. Japan and US playing different versions is always a shit situation.
Which is actually a shame since looking back. At least in my case I wish I got into fighting games during the 3rd Strike/CVS2 era since I’ve really liked them the time I’ve spent playing them, and I think they can be hype to watch.
Capcom at that time really confused SF fans. SF2, Alpha, EX and III coexisted and competed for market share. Adding also the VS series made things more difficult for III. EX had also new characters yet it met with more success than III and a lot of those characters are in higher regard than those in 3S. It was a mistake not releasing the game for Playstation 2 earlier.
Also in SFIII New Generation and Second Impact are almost forgotten. Eg Dreamcast had a good compilation of SFIII SI and NG but it was ignored. Also there wasnt a good console version of 3S till the PS2 release.
While in the Alpha/Zero series all three games were popular
ill be honest i never knew it existed…then i saw it and knew why… its like ken n chun were thrown into a a game capcom was making for japan with weird chars and then decided they wanted to call it sf and put in ken n chun.
That thing did not start out a sf game. Fucking main boss is a dude in a speedo…it was a capcom anime game. With weebo chars…cool game tho…but its Not sf. I refuse to believe 3s a sf game or started out as one.
Alpha and ex series n marvelz, most of my homies have no idea 3s exists either.
lol. It’s funny you should say that because, ever since I found out Ryu & Ken weren’t planned to appear in SF3 at first, I’ve wondered if SF3 was actually supposed to be a sequel originally. Especially since it works so differently from other SF games and wasn’t promoted near as much.
There is no special specific “Capcom anime fighter”. Every Capcom fighter is anime. Yipes himself has admitted Marvel’s anime, and there’s no way you can say SF doesn’t have the basic anime-esque things when you consider things like Ryu pretty much throws mini kame-hame-ha’s (complete with pose), Cammy’s outfit, and Rose’s origin story (she’s the literally the “good half” of Bison’s soul). This isn’t bad, but there’s always been a lot of anime-like stuff in Street Fighter and other Capcom fighters.
Who is Yipes, a designer for Marvel? Marvel is based on western comics, I don’t consider those anime. You are right that Street fighter is definitely anime, classic anime. I think as has been said before, it is modern anime that is so different from western tastes (while really old anime had more similar with western comics) that makes it hard for Westerners to get into.
Not enough of the marvel cast air dashes to a point where we could call it anime on a technical sense; probably why Tataki and Specs renamed the ones more commonly known as anime to Air Dashers. People calling Eternal Fighter Zero or AquaPazza anime are lol though.
Marvel IS the capcom anime game but it isn’t as air dashy for the cast as much as the Arc Sys games; Tatsunoko vs Capcom would probably the definitive anime game for Capcom (in terms of mechanics).
From what I’ve seen most people who play airdashers typically prefer the term to “anime” anyway because not only does it have some weird stigma, but just about every fighting game series except for maybe Virtua Fighter has some amount of anime aspects.
As hallarious as this comment is I actually agree with this. Characters like Twelve and necro look like something straight out of Darkstalkers, and characters like Remy Urien and Gill look more at home in KOF.
They’re called anime fighters cause they’re highly influenced by ArcSys’ signature visual style (even though every JP made fighter is influenced by anime in some way, shape, or form). ArcSys themselves said that they aim for their games to have an “anime-like” look to them. Apparently it caught on in Japan and the rest speaks for itself. Unfortunate that it’s devolved into some vague slang term that’s mostly used to say “I don’t play this shitty ass ‘Japanese’ game.”
It has little to do with mechanics or types of characters, it’s just most anime fighters are stereotyped as being system-heavy and for sad life weebs, which goes back into how vague of a term it is. Hokuto no Ken (shounen themed airdasher with masculine men) and Aquapazza (shoujo themed fighter with ‘traditional’ gameplay and mostly young girls) are both considered ‘anime fighters’ simply cause they look like ArcSys made them (did make the former, Examu made the latter).
The reason it didn’t catch on was due to the fact it was a 2D-fighting game released kinda late into the Dreamcast’s lifespan (right around the time people were high on the PS2 hype). Pretty late to the game even for a brand as powerful as Street Fighter.
I’m pretty sure this is some form of English, but I’ll be god damned if I can figure out what its saying.
thoughts act 2:
-
just because anime games (personally I include AP and SKM, among other spacing-oriented games, in the anime category, in that people around my region don’t play them because of the aesthetic, independent of what their gameplay is like) are niche (in the sense of a minority), they may (as well as may not) have the potential to grow into a larger playerbase, like other genres (FPSes, mobas, JRPGs…); “being made for a specific demographic” shouldn’t mean that said demographic should always stay big/small (mechas and shooting games seemed to have been a real thing in Japan once, for example… then, JRPGs happened)
-
when considering about a new player’s options for choosing a game or community to “be part of”, one such player might consider joining one which feels more stable than others; FGs which appear more in mass media tend to draw the attention/awareness of more players, and “help consolidate their brand” in the minds of the potential customers; even though there are a lot of options for FGs, only a few of them seem to feel like “viable options” to the casual player (where imho the money’s at). Imho, just to exemplify the importance of “consumer awareness”, “playerbase stability” and of “building a well known brand”, bigger franchises such as SF, MK, etc. (even large franchises of other genres) would lose existing and potential new players (they would likely go somewhere else) if they could only count (for the most part) on their own playerbases to advertise their games.
-
as for building stability, FGs and arcades had a good chance in their prime time to get people to play them, when there wasn’t other genres/online option to compete with arcades (I’ve said this in my previous post), nowadays, newer FGs have more problems than before to build their playerbases; Capcom and NRS (for example) are doing what I consider to be “strategically correct moves” by hosting tournaments often (this detail is important) and have enough advertisement to help the average (casual) player remember their games; there are two ways for games/franchises to become profitable: 1- the playerbase turns the game/franchise into a cultural phenomenon without the help of external factors, which in turn gets the attention of the media, which in turn has the potential to increase the playerbase, etc., or 2- the game/franchise developer helps develop a playerbase.
edit: forgot to mention that the very arcade scene was an example of games becoming profitable due to a large demand; when other options (PC, MMOs, console games, online… etc.) arrived/become more accessible, demand has lowered, arcades lost space because they stopped being profitable.
-
as for a game being made for a demographic… a game can be made for 1- casual players, 2- whatever the opposite of casual players is, or 3- both; if the developer chooses 1, they have the advantage of a larger playerbase = more profit; if they choose 2, they might fulfill the demand of the smaller playerbase with little or no competition from other developers; if they choose 3, they might reach both kinds of players, some of the casual players might choose to improve (motivated – partially or not – by a larger “audience” and awareness of the game/franchise from others), less people would be inclined to stop playing (as long as the game manages to keep its numbers)
-
the format of FGs (as opposed of FPSes and MOBAs) have the “disadvantage” of undisputably showing losers (casual players who aren’t part of a solid team can have the option to blame their teammates, or rely on other players to carry them), of requiring effort (which could be considered by some, a “frustration element”), and of not easily allowing the player to find a solution to stop losing (for FPSes, some could think “just respawn and try again”, for example); I’ve seen people (who aren’t fg enthusiasts) try to play against me (to get the feel of the game, or to know how the game is like), without prior training, briefing, etc… and give up and leave after some matches. They’re not getting to the fun part of FGs, imho. (which imho could be an interesting subject to talk about; a game needs to have A- something that pleases the player – specific gameplay or features, or the amount of easily learnable characters, for example --, B- the player needs to be aware of them – through first-hand experience, videos, tutorials, forums, sites, friends, etc. – and C- the player has to be able to execute whatever decision he has made – “I know that my character has a combo starting from an overhead but I can’t do it because I don’t remember what I should input to do it”; the player might find a game fun, among other things, when/if he stops thinking, “what should I press”, and starts thinking, “what should I do” --; how well the player will find fun in a game, might be in how well A intersect with B and C)