What do "OG" 3rd Strikers think of SFV?

Street Fighter V
1

I’ve took note about this topic in the Laura sub-forums and also in my local community as well as in other ones world wide and it’s something that I find interesting and worth exploring.

Back in 05 I started playing 3rd Strike and it was my main game for more then 5 years, we were pretty decent here in Vienna/Austria - had even one guy making it to the SBO in 07 or 08 I think, but that’s not the point now. When SF4 came out it brought a lot of fresh blood to our community here, they liked SF4 a lot and a lot of us from the “Old-Guard” just didn’t, so we kept playing 3rd Strike for a while but ended up eventually playing SF4. Because (I can speak only for myself) I like to competition and by 2010 most of us jumped to SF4. With less of an Edge of course but we’ve competed with the new kids. Even tough most of us didn’t like the game. Fast forward to 2016 and SFV is here and we see a different picture, I for one think SFV is a great game and in many cases it reminds me of 3rd Strike and in general I like how the game is played, a lot more then SF4. And that is the case with many 3rd Strike players from our scene. While SF4 players in general seem to hate how the game is played. And I’ve seen a lot of former 3rd Strike players internationally actually liking the gameplay of SFV even though they mostly skipped SF4 - most notably maybe Gunfight.

So I would like to know if other players who started out with 3rd Strike feel the same way?

2

I started from SF4 but ended up developing a love- hate relationship with it.

Now I like SF5 more than I ever liked SF4.

3

The first SF game I ever played was SFIIWW and I loved it, even though it was so unpolished. HF refined WW and I loved it. I played Super and ST but always preferred HF. I hated 3rd Strike. The mechanics, the weird characters, even the music. I liked SFIV, and I dislike SFV.

It seems that many people who like II (ST/HF) like IV. People who like 3rd Strike like V.

4

OG 3rd Striker. I like it. Lot of similar concepts. Hit confirming, basic bnbs aren’t overly long or tight to time, dashing is strong and jumps are a bit more viable as well. In 3S you could eventually scare people with supers or mess with their parry timing to deter them from jumping too much, but in 3S it’s more just about picking someone with strong AA or doing a lot of inprovising if you arent.

Season 1 Chun initially drew me into the game. Saw she had a lot of her 3S buttons, cancelable low forward, b+hp and one hit confirms into super or ex off those buttons. Cammy plays a lot like 3S Ken also. The shotos don’t really have the buttons they did in 3S, but their momentum and emphasis on target and one hit confirms is like 3S also.

Ultra David has also said the game fits well for 3S players and I’ve seen some 3S veterans like Frankie play the game that I don’t believe played much of IV

5

i’ve been playing 3S since 2003 and i hate SFV. crappy normals and pokes unlike 3S. rare use of supers. VT feels like the new Ultra mechanic. crappy throws. almost instant recovery from knockdowns that r sometimes impossible to punish. extremely safe normals and short active frames. very little pushback on blocked normals and some specials. animations do not match frame data, fooling you into thinking something is safe/unsafe. feels nothing like 3S to me personally but i see how some people make the connection.

6

Played 3S for a long, long time. Learned most of what I know from it and always try my best to retain the 3S mindset in every fighting game.

In regards to SFV, it’s no secret on this forum that I do not at all consider SFV to be a very good game at this point. However, in comparing to 3S, the best I can say is… I think if you were to take all of the flaws and garbage in SFV and brush them aside, you might underneath it find a hint of SF3. Not Third Strike though, I feel like SFV if it played more at it’s core elements, would feel (currently) like New Generation than 3S. That’s not particularly a compliment, as NG is not a very good game, but it’s basic elements would be fitting for an SFV comparison.

I tried really hard to like SFV, but the more I played it, the more I realized it was just not fun. All of the things I find flawed, while in isolation would not bother me, are so abundant that it just culminates into a very unsatisfying experience. There was a time after I was done with SFV that I went back and played 3S after not playing it for about a year, and I was just blown away by how easy it was to whiff punish, react to everything, control my space – if I wanted to keep someone out, I could. SFV is just too random and restrictive for me.

If you haven’t already read my complaints about SFV, I’ll quickly write a few…

[details=Spoiler]

  • Input Delay/Leniency/Buffer
  • Hitboxes designed by robots, with an emphasis on hurtboxes, which completely destroys move interaction and move priority (button priority is different). It is rare to even have moves with hitboxes extending beyond the hurtbox (especially in the air). Aerial hurtboxes are universal and don’t match anyone’s jump animation.
  • Frame data by virtue of the input buffer is formulaic and results in excessive repetition in matches
  • No active frames
  • Slow throws
  • Entire V-System does not interact with itself in anyway that could be called organic and are very bland in most cases
  • VTs are essentially comeback mechanics with strength comparable to ultras, and perhaps arguably even more poorly designed
  • Meter building for both bars is completely ass-backwards.
  • Weak character options and character move variety
  • Arbitrary removal of any form of complexity
  • Restrictive juggle system
  • [/details]

And so on…

It really is an endless list. The end result is that SFV is a game where everyone plays in similar ranges, with weak buttons, with the constant threat of various committal things like jumping, dashing, or random buttons, preventing you from playing efficiently. You don’t have a space to play at, nor the reaction speed to defend against it, so every action you take is a ridiculous risk because of that. There is a reason Daigo for the longest time tried to play the reactionary game, and it was my train of thought as well, and it’s essentially this…

In 3S, the entire point of the game is to force your opponent to take a risk, so you can punish it. 3S is a game of punishment. How good your opponent is, makes it especially harder to push them to the point of taking a risk. In SFV however, people take risks, constantly. You don’t have to make them do it, you don’t have to form an immaculate offense or a great footsie game, they will take risks – always. If you could just react to it and punish them for it, you could win every time. I know Daigo was seeing it too, this was very clear in S1, where he kept seeing how even the best players would take risks, so he thought… “If I just sit and block, and be super respectful, eventually they WILL give me something to punish.”

And it’s true, they do. It’s just, with the delay, and really awkward slow throws that coincide with most medium normals, the lack of any defensive options – it’s hard to react in SFV in neutral and on the first initial wake-up sequence it is just rock-paper-scissors. Ideally it’s the best way to play right now with how people are playing, but it’s just not possible. SFV does not reward consistent play, it rewards going balls to the wall crazy.

1 Like
7

I agree with most of that. I guess I’ll be OT in here since there’s nothing else going on ATM on this forum. But sf5 is a great game at high level. I really enjoy watching smug and punk and idom play.

But the problem is that it’s so high level that it isn’t reachable for us mere mortals. Punk wiff punishes shit like it’s his business, smug has the greatest frame trap and stagger game around, and idom has endless pokestrings that set you up for various things.

I try to play like them and am getting better at it, but it’s tough as hell. At low level, players are just throwing out random shit that is very hard to react to. So low level (but still solid/know combos and footsies and mixup theory) often play at a range where a jumpin will wiff, the reason why is obvious… with this game there is a basic neutral game mixup that loses effectiveness at high level but fucking dominates low level:

Make opponent chase you then do:

  1. Jump in
  2. Dash in
  3. Long range unreactable move (nash mk scythe, Mika charged hk (can react, but hard to react in the good way which is to stuff it in startup) birdie bullhead, urien ex tackle etc etc etc

That basic 3 way mixup dominates low level play. So to deal with it low level players will play at a range where those moves don’t apply… outside dash range, jump range and unreactable move range.

It doesn’t always play out like this, some characters don’t have a great long range unreactable, but by and large this is how it goes. Then watch the pros play and you notice that they play footsies and stand just outside of normal move range. That range is what streetfighter has always tended to be, but since the 3 way neutral mixup is so hard to react to, only the good players get to really play that game.

There are things put into the game and designed to give different options… like akuma in the Chun matchup can just throw fireballs on the ground, then he can jumpin with a divekick, or airfireball, or regular jump.

It just doesn’t feel like streetfighter tbh. This is also a problem that sf4 had in many matchups, but not all, but it’s even worse in 5. Then you make jabs very bad for confirmation while also making throws not the greatest when done from tick situations.

It’s hard to be creative in the game because many situations feel hyper binary.

I don’t hate the game though. I’ve come to accept what it is and try to concentrate on the things I do like, like the upclose frame trap/stagger game and the fact that most opponents can’t really pull you unawares unless you don’t know the matchup.

As far as what real 3s players think of it?

Well I’m not a 3s player but I know for a fact that the diehards tend to hate every game not 3s. It’s a very polarising game. Where sf5 lacks creativity, 3s is probably the most creative game that capcom has put out with the streetfighter moniker.

I’m an ST player and ST is a game that doesn’t lack real creativity, but it can be hard to get to it’s creative side sometimes when it’s lowest level of play from people experienced with the game is still kinda strong. Tick throws are super easy in ST and anyone can do them. At low levels it’s hard to get around this. Once you get past that though the game is way more about neutral than anything else because most characters can’t easily bypass neutral with a fast dash or some impossible to AA move (sim and vega come closest).

8

No comment

9

huh, I’ve found it to be the opposite. low level players end up playing really close since most buttons are short, and it seems intuitive that you’d want to keep your opponent in poke range

but high level players understand that the close range is a death trap, and that it’s often easier to control space from outside of poke range. jwong almost always plays this way for instance.

that’s just what I’ve observed, though. I really don’t understand the game’s meta at this point.

10

I played 3S competitively for 2 years, from 2004 to 2006 in Japan. That’s where I learned how to properly play Sf. Then life happened and I gradually played more and more casually. Sfiv I strictly played with friends and was never good at it. And then I altogether dropped SF for years.

Sfv pisses me off because I see no evolution, really. I was mad hype at launch because my 2 mains(vega, bison) were in, plus I was ready to finally get back into SF. Well, the ass netcode, homogeneous playstyles, slow walkspeeds and ragequitters made me…quit. I’m still poking around to see what the new characters bring to the table, but I cannot find a single character that’s as fun and intricate to play as 3S necro. Juggles are restrictive and the game is stupid frame data heavy. Half the game feels like CC bait oriented footsies and execution became non-existent in favor of simplicity that no one asked for.

I think there’s a handful of characters with much more room for growth and interesting crap like urien, ibuki and bison but beyond that everything is just…a tad bit boring. Plud those characters get cool resets and setups merely from v-trigger; otherwise I they are still flat. Bottom line for me is that the game doesn’t have to be better than 3S per say but it could be equal at least. It feels like a step backwards to me.

11

‘OG 3rd Strikers’

fuck I’m old

12

I have played SF2, the Alpha games and 3S (mostly 3S). Speaking as a casual player I enjoy playing SFV, the game play feels great and it is a step up from SFIV (so happy that ultra comebacks are not a thing in this game).

My only gripe has been the fight money/character color grinding, but I’m over it since missions are now available so more opportunities to get FM are there.

13

ST has a huge execution barrier for me and it reminds me of those impossible arcade games.

ST feels a little robotic to me. I was a fan of A3 and when I got 3S I really enjoyed its freeform style. It felt like a game where you could adapt on the fly, while in ST you’d need a strategy from when the round starts.

I’m still struggling to get past gold in SF5, partly because of an inadequate controller mind you, But I’m learning the game and enjoying the fisticuffs style the game has even more so than 3S. With Ryu the fireball zoning was like 20% in 3S but it’s up to 70% in SF5 if 100% was the old SF2 games.

14

3rd strike is largely a footsie game where the whiff punish is king. Even characters with garbage footsies can whiff punish everyone in the game besides chun li consistently. It can be argued the most broken thing about Chun-Li in that game is that you can’t reactive whiff punish her cr. MK, if you could she would not nearly be half as dominant as she is (there are other ways to fight her, but in general this is easily the most broken thing about the character with #2 being her super dmg and #3 being her stupid crouching hurt box).

When you fight chun-li since you can’t reactive whiff punish you have to preemptively crush her cr. MK with a sweep or some FP/HK move which generally creates a lot of risk for you and pretty low reward for most of the cast on success. Some other footsies exist that can take advantage of the hurtbox/hitbox combinations but in general you do have to play a bit of SFV footises because she breaks the footsie game basically every other character is playing because of the same issues most medium normals have in this game.

I feel like the entire neutral of SFV is taken from this dumb situation. Normals are fast and short ranged with quickly retracting hurtbox so most of the footsie game is pre-emptive. Footsie’s aren’t even 50% pre-emptive in 3S. This is compounded by v-trigger and empty buffering to a degree the game is just annoying to play since you can just get random CC or random poke with a buffer into an easy stun and death. Hit confirming is laughably stupid in this game and CC’s are a shit mechanic because of how haphazardly they are implemented.

I like 3S but the risk reward in most matchups and poking game is much more rewarding to learn and play then what you get here. Getting 100% combo’d in 3S feels less crappy then getting lol’d to death by Balrog because all that stuff as conditions you can play around or the player has to take risks not empty buffer a move at a range all day. Makoto can’t 100% stun you without command grabbing you while SHE is the corner … so you can … just not corner her … which is what Kuroda does. You can always jump forcing them to take big punishable risks if they want to raw st. FP into the combo which if you just happened to block mean you probably won the round. Urien has 100% combo unblockable resets but the top 6 or so characters out play him so bad it is entirely possible he’ll never get the chance. His easier unblockables can actually be parried out of also.

3S is bullshit but it is bullshit that can be overcome by being the better player. In SFV the better player will win more for sure, but there is an inherent randomness to the neutral that is stupid which forces people to always be rushing each other down because playing neutral is just not what the game is about. Not playing neutral is not SF to me and the game suffers imo because of it.

15

Gonna agree with DJ over here.

At the very least, SFV is a game that wants to copy from 3S, taking a lot of concepts from the latter. The only issue for me is the stubby buttons which takes a lot of that 3S feel out (speaking as a Chun player in 3S) and the input delay.

16

like any other old game with diehard supporters, a few of them will play the new SF, most of them won’t give it a second thought, and the few who do will be held up as some kind of evidence that “this new game is just like the old one”

17

SF5 is SF2 with better graphics

18

Stop spreading lies. XD
I think only you and dino genuinly like the game.

19

Compared to 3rd Strike, definitely a few steps back.

I like alot of the directions Capcom took with SFV to make it more traditional. SFV has the potential to be better than SF4, but it’s up to Capcom to inject “fun” and more dimensions to SFV. The funneled and flat gameplay it has now ain’t working.

20

Started with SF2

Hated half of SF3 cast and the lack of muh veterans, but art was great and game was fun

Loved SF4 returning to true Classic SF (SF2), but art was lesser and game was a bit less fun

Cast wise i absolutely love the idea of core classics being in while keeping space for innovation (is was SF3 should have been), art direction sometimes seem made by a dead monkey and game is imho very fun but… “poor”? I will like my characters having more tools and new moves and shit