My homegames are ST,KoF98 and CVS2.
Allthough I started with SF back in 2008, after I played some ST on fightcade I begane to hate IV with a passion.
And I learned how the neutralgame works and what footsies is in 98 and a little bit in ST, but mainly 98.
bob basically covered it. except it’s even more varied. we’re all individuals. let’s try not to make things fit some kind of larger narrative or ‘community’.
Frame data is VERY important in SF V, because there is no invincible backdash and many moves are +on block. You have to know which normals and specials are -on block in order to get your turn.
Didn’t really have a fun time playing 4, years later into SFV, I realize I hated 4. FA cancels made almost anything safe. 1 framers were dumb imo, yeah you can do things like jab jab jab sweep but is having to practice that and have precise execution worth it? Later in the game you could do hefty red focus combos, but that just favored the execution fiends (which the game already heavily favored) and alienated people who liked the neutral game. Ultras were a hit and miss.
My favorite series was the Alpha series which I feel is very comparable to SFV. I think the whole “stale” view people have about SFV is more of how most season 1 characters were designed. Now that we see more complex characters coming out in season 2 the game seems a lot more entertaining to watch, while keeping the gameplay pretty balanced in terms of the neutral, rush, defensive, and combo aspects.
EDIT: I’ll even beat you in this trash game if it will give credence to my hatred.
ANOTHER ONE:
wtf are you talking about? Of course it’s true for older games. That’s a simple breakdown of how to play footsies in any damn game and SFV is a game for babies.
Jblair: Your original post indicated that it was too simplified. We disagreed and say it’s more complex, to which you agree and say it applies also to older games…
so make up your mind, which is it? Is it too simplified because of the frame advantage or is more complex like older games?
Semantics. The game is more simplified in certain aspects and more complex in others. I think that he’s saying is that the places where it is simplified were more fun when they were more complex.
For me this is true, and I also don’t find to much fun in the games more complex systems because I find them redundant.
Another similarity aside the dash-in mixups between Third Strike & SFV we haven’t mentioned yet is that you can time your heavy attacks to crush counter or – “parry”, pretty much exactly the same way, i.e. timing.
SF5 tries to be like 3S but ultimately is just not, honestly I feel SF4 is more similar to 3S because you always have options on offense and defense and you have greater opportunity to be creative. In SF5 everything is bad. Neutral buttons are bad, offense is bad but defense is even worse: everything is gimped and oversimplified.
In 3S you always have an answer for every situation and you’re never truly helpless, even when you’re in an unblockable situation you have options. In SF5 you have almost no options on defense and always have to suffer through ridiculous 50/50 setups where even if you correctly block you lose sometimes a good 20-30 damage in gray health and chip. Which is fine until you realize that the neutral game is all about flailing stubby normals or CC normals that are so hard to make whiff because of the walkspeeds, recovery and hurtboxes.
Overall SF5 is always such an oppressive game where you are always so limited on what you can do and how you do it, and 3S is a game with so much freedom and so many tools to work with that you always have answers to every situation and never feel boxed. I like the principle of SF5 but the execution just falls so flat.
walk speed in 3S is very slow. The game overall is very slow, but the pacing is OK since there is no hard knockdown aside from Super Arts
the only tool you have in 3S is parrying, it’s not “so many tools”. I agree parrying is awesome and prevents some matchups from being completely broken. Just think about Hugo VS a zoner without parrying. would be a nightmare.
Sf5 has lots of similarities between alpha 2 and 3s, but it captures the magic of neither game.
Alpha had oppressive pokes and most things being safe on block and not necessarily giving up your turn. While also having no dash and fast walk speeds and small stages. The small stages thing is huge because it forces action or the corner. Sf5 has HUGE stages.
3s has parry, and parry opens up a huge amount of mind games from throws to slow moves when it’s technically correct to use fast moves, and fast moves when it’s technically correct to use slow moves, it also has a high/low game because of parry.
And throws are huge in that game.
Sf5 takes basically the worst aspects of both games and puts it in streetfighter. Some people like it because it still harkens back to nostalgia for them if they are wearing dark enough glasses and can delude themselves into thinking it’s 3s/alpha 2 with updated graphics and gameplay. But in all honesty it’s just a game where everything is highly nerfed and it feels like a step backwards in terms of gameplay.