Street Fighter IV

Started by Sado22145 pages

Justframe: you're posts are way too long. post a summary and then i'll reply 😂

"
1. don't care about consoles
2. don't plan on buying one
3. don't have an Xbox360
4. don't plan on buying one
5. don't have a PS3
6. don't plan on buying one
7. was a regular at the arcades
8. don't plan on going there that much now
9. never bought a PS2 but a friend gave it to me last year
10. all that time its been arcades. only.
11. in fact, i've moved on from videogames as a whole
"

You're absolute scum and a god damned liar. How the hell can you comment on the game if you don't even own a home version and refuse to name any arcades? 👇 Get the **** out, you scrubby ass fanboy.

Scum?

Grow up.

Originally posted by TricksterPriest
"
1. don't care about consoles
2. don't plan on buying one
3. don't have an Xbox360
4. don't plan on buying one
5. don't have a PS3
6. don't plan on buying one
7. was a regular at the arcades
8. don't plan on going there that much now
9. never bought a PS2 but a friend gave it to me last year
10. all that time its been arcades. only.
11. in fact, i've moved on from videogames as a whole
"

You're absolute scum and a god damned liar. How the hell can you comment on the game if you don't even own a home version and refuse to name any arcades? 👇 Get the **** out, you scrubby ass fanboy.


TricksterPriest, consider that a warning for bashing. You will not talk like that around here.

Originally posted by Sado22
"I know I'm wrong that's why I don't reply and continue to make excuses"

In short...

You don't have the proper knowledge to comment on Street Fighter IV and make statements that you claim are facts.

This is the problem here, and then you proceed to argue with everyone who disagree's with you when in fact, they know far more about the game itself then you do.

It's simply sad that you don't even "go to the arcades" to play Street Fighter IV, nor do you even own the game, and yet you "assume" that you know what your talking about. This is why it's nearly pointless to be "debating" with you anymore, because your detracting the thread away from SF:IV and all about you and your "I don't like home-console" comments. The fact is, Street Fighter IV is the best overall current fighting game at this point, with a great variety of playable characters at the high levels, a great level amount of strategy vs strategy, there is no broken characters, nor are their any broken moves or what not within the game of Street Fighter IV.

If you can't zone, you will die, if you don't know how to avoid fireballs you will die (<--- something you obviously haven't learned yet), if you don't know your footsie games, you will die, if you don't know your mixups, cross ups, you will die, if you don't know how to set up your Ultra's, or know how to burn meter effectively you will die. There is nothing remotely terrible about the game of Street Fighter IV, when in contrast to the majority of 1st installment SF games, this is the best one with the most balanced roster.

Again, when you accumilate all of this together and someone such as yourself claims "This game is garbage, blah, blah, so cheap, blah blah." Yes, everyone who has proper, and well develop knowledge of SF:IV will tell you that you probably spent a total of 15 minutes on the game, because nobody will a great amount of time spent on it would say so otherwise.

Also, if you didn't like the game of SF:IV, however you made well based arguments for you opinion, with good knowledge of it, then I would respect that, however the comments of "Seth is broken" "Tiger, Tiger, Tiger Uppercut...So Cheap?!" don't hold any water for an opinion, other then you never played the game well enough to make a solid one in the first place.

Honestly, I don't hate you, however you need to man up, and simply except, your not as well knowledge about this game as you'd like to believe. With that said, Street Fighter IV is an awesome game, and let's stop derailing this thread, and pertain it only to Street Fighter IV.

PS: I still want to play you on Mame or GGPO in Street Fighter, I'll send you a PM.

Don't take Sado too seriously, fellas.

Originally posted by JustFrame
The fact is, Street Fighter IV is the best overall current fighting game at this point, with a great variety of playable characters at the high levels, a great level amount of strategy vs strategy, there is no broken characters, nor are their any broken moves or what not within the game of Street Fighter IV.

Subjective. I think BlazBlue is overall better. But that's mainly because the characters aren't copies of one another with minor tweaks to the attributes.

SFIV is boring because it's so slow and playing footsie all day grows tiresome. I do love me a few hours of Cammy play, but the game is bland.

Originally posted by JustFrame
yes, Lariat is very good if you don't know how to go up against it.

I had a tough time during 08 when I first went up against Lariat, however you found out subtle things like...don't Hadouken when Gief is slightly close to mid-screen with bar, s.fk is your friend in stopping his advances, Ex-Hadouken's are your friend, ShoryukenxxFadc is a must, and footsie games are a must learn if you plan to play Ryu against him. However, I don't mind Lariat the way it is actually, since it only just makes Gief a contender.

it feels like it makes him more than just a contender

also.. what do you think of hurricane kick? (I dont think I've asked this before)... to me it feels like it was made to be terrible .. ryu's tatsumaki that is.. ken's is kinda aiight to me cuz of the rotation speed

Originally posted by Konton
Subjective. I think BlazBlue is overall better. But that's mainly because the characters aren't copies of one another with minor tweaks to the attributes.

SFIV is boring because it's so slow and playing footsie all day grows tiresome. I do love me a few hours of Cammy play, but the game is bland.

The relative similarities between characters in SF:IV is actually quite small, and I'm sure the multiple Shoto's is usually the most pointed at culprits, however their gameplays between one another are very, very unique in large ways.

Consider me for example, I have played Ryu nearly throughout my entire SF "life" if you will. However switching between Ryu to Ken to this day is like switching from one character to a completely different one in many cases, due to the fact that my strategy vs strategy for Ryu in many cases will not work in the same factor for Ken (the only similarity they do share is that their footsie game is slightly the same however Ryu's Hadouken, and Ken's poking options with his long range kicks also changes things up differently). The move-sets maybe the same in a few places, such as Hadouken, Shoryuken, Hurricane Kick. However the properties on them are drastic, in frame advantages/disadvantages, and even unique attacks only for that said character.

If I were to use Ken or Gouki instead of Ryu up against solid level players like myself, I will flat out play worse, because overall they are too different from one another to utilize the same options. Obviously the fact that I may not play them as well as Ryu, however their overall gameplan is very unique from one another that the differentials are large enough to separate the strategical aspects to win.

So although I agree that they may share some similarities, their playstyle being is the true separation in their cases, and even Sakura the other "Shoto" character is the most unique out of them all. This same case can also be applied to another game such as Tekken for example to where you have Jin, Heihachi, and Kazuya, all of whom are Mishima's and they all have some moves that are the same, however the differentials in which they play are vastly different from one another that if you played one, and went to the other, it would almost feel as though you were taking a first step again.

Also, I wasn't more clear on my statement of SF:IV, because overall, it is arguably the most played current fighting game on a global scale in contrast to other current new fighting games today on a competitive level. Although this usually isn't the right way to judge a fighting game however the strategical value of SF:IV is very high (Still not as good as SFII, but it's definitely 100x better then the last installment, the SFIII series), and with that acclamation gives it more credibility.

I agree, playing footsies isn't for everyone (absolute nightmare to truly master, I've been playing for years, and my Ryu footsie game never reach super elite level😠 ) , and I enjoy this far more then anything else on a fighting game, because it's way more methodical in most cases, due to the fact that it isn't a pure "let's just rushdown" mentality. Not everyone in SF:IV relies on footsies, some are dominant rushdown/mixup characters (Viper, Blanka), others whom are dominant footsies (Ryu), and you've got your zone you to death characters (Sagat). Tons of character variety in here, so nobody is left behind on what mentality they want to play like, which is another gem for any fighting game enthusiast.

Originally posted by SaTsuJiN
it feels like it makes him more than just a contender

also.. what do you think of hurricane kick? (I dont think I've asked this before)... to me it feels like it was made to be terrible .. ryu's tatsumaki that is.. ken's is kinda aiight to me cuz of the rotation speed

Gief's Lariat is beastly without a doubt, I will not lie, however when you go up against competent players who know how to defend and retaliate against Lariat, you simply throw it out less often, and with far greater care. Back in 2008, everybody complained about this move, and not a whole lot of people knew of ways around it, however in mid 2009, the situation is very different.

Up against the weaker characters in SF:IV he'll have more success utilizing this along with his powerful arsenal, however up against the strong to strongest character, he actually has more uphill battles then he does advantages. So although I agree Lariat is good, but with the current ways of defending and countering it, I feel the Lariat is now quite tame in contrast to what I felt of it back in '08.

As for the hurricane kick, I don't think it's really that bad at all, imo, Ken's is alright, considering I've never really liked his Hurricane Kick since the CE/HF days were it was absolutely crazy and very strong, however to be honest I've never truly liked the overall hurricane kicks of both Ryu and Ken since those days period (better pay off, far superior priority which was the biggest part) rofl.

However, personally, I like Ryu's more so then Ken's only for the fact that it knocks the opponent down, where as in contrast, Ken's does not. Also, Ryu's in SF:IV has more flexibility due to the options he has in SF:IV, I mean, near or at corner's, you can do some pretty nasty options, like Ex-Tatsu>>Ultra for example, because the opponent always flies to the corner when hit no matter what.

Seriously, you people read all of that? 😐

He responds to four sentences with a fvcking essay.

Well I read it. It's not like there's never been any long posts before.

Originally posted by JustFrame
As for the hurricane kick, I don't think it's really that bad at all, imo, Ken's is alright, considering I've never really liked his Hurricane Kick since the CE/HF days were it was absolutely crazy and very strong, however to be honest I've never truly liked the overall hurricane kicks of both Ryu and Ken since those days period (better pay off, far superior priority which was the biggest part) rofl.

However, personally, I like Ryu's more so then Ken's only for the fact that it knocks the opponent down, where as in contrast, Ken's does not. Also, Ryu's in SF:IV has more flexibility due to the options he has in SF:IV, I mean, near or at corner's, you can do some pretty nasty options, like Ex-Tatsu>>Ultra for example, because the opponent always flies to the corner when hit no matter what.

Yeah I definitely like shinkuu tatsumaki.. probably one of the more creative Ex's I've seen, next to the blade kick wall bounce

it just feels like everytime I go to regular tatsu out of nowhere (just for the sake of mindgames, even though I'm not the bomb or anything).. I just get jabbed or air thrown out of it like its garbage and its kindof annoying

Hurricane kicks are not a move you want to randomly throw out. I mostly use them to cover ground/fireballs(except Fagat's high/Guile because his recovery is insane) I main Ryu and I use the tatsu when I want to finish a combo because it nets me a knockdown. In the air you can use Ryu's extatsu to bait/evade ultras(if the opponent is dumb enough to try to use an ultra as antiair) I also use the regular tatsu to highfly out of corners/risky situations without getting hit with other char's regulars (ex Balrog's cHP) Oh yeah you can crossover with a tatsu when airborne and follow it with a shinku.

As for Ken...well ken's tatsu is more combo oriented and keeps the guess game in the momentum because it doesn't knockdown. the ex air tatsu is terrific because its fast and can be used as a crossover. Problem with ken's tatsu is that...well Gief pretty much ruins it with his fkn Lariat.

Akuma's light tatsu is Pimp because it can be followed with a Heavy Shoryuken that in turn can be canceled into a shakenetsu hadoken.

BTW did you know the direction of Gouken's air-tatsu can be controlled? I forget if it was the ex version, but its very cool.

Don't take Sado too seriously, fellas

hey... 🙁

@JustFrame:dude, is this your summary? 😕

In short...

i actually had my hopes high there for a minute. i fear the day you and DarkC ever get into an argument 😂

You don't have the proper knowledge to comment on Street Fighter IV and make statements that you claim are facts.

dude, there is no claims that are facts. i said SF4 looks fugly, and i never pretended it was a fact. it was my opinion. i said SF4 was boring. lots of people here agree with me on that. I said SF4 isn't offering anything new and that too has people agreeing with me (to the point that people are defending it saying that its nostalgia). these are all my opinions and things i've noticed about the game. the day SF4 offers good graphics, good new characters, a new fighting system (SF3 for instance), I will be happy. as of now though, SF4 sucks. just like you think its the best game there out today.
its subjective. the only person acting like what they are saying is a fact...is you.

This is the problem here, and then you proceed to argue with everyone who disagree's with you when in fact, they know far more about the game itself then you do.

to be honest, i don't know what your issue is. someone shows up here and says tekken is a better game and all of a sudden two guys start taking it personally. why is that? i asked you that straight up last time and you didn't answer. you just made a claim about SF4 being the best game there is. but you're missing the thing here:
its your OPINION and it aint a fact. its all subjective. only two people going around having a problem with opinion here: you and trickster.

It's simply sad that you don't even "go to the arcades" to play Street Fighter IV, nor do you even own the game, and yet you "assume" that you know what your talking about.

nothing sad about not going to arcades to play a game (that i played several times before) that I don't want to play because it bored me. its like me asking you to watch a movie that you didn't like or a series you're not interested in. do you see?
i think you have selective amnesia honestly. i just said, very clearly, that i played SF4 on the arcades (many times) and with friends...and i didn't like it. there's nothing sad about it. at all. the only thing sad is that you're panties are all in a bundle because i don't like the game you like. pucker up, son. 'tis how the world is.

This is why it's nearly pointless to be "debating" with you anymore, because your detracting the thread away from SF:IV and all about you and your "I don't like home-console" comments.

its not an argument. i said i don't like console and all of a sudden you guys are calling me sad and whatnot. i'm not a console person. doesn't make me less of a player. I've practically wiped the floor with cats who own SF and KoF on 3 consoles. it aint about consoles. get real.
and again, its all subjective. i can talk about any game as long as its on arcasdes and choose to like it or hate it on my own personal free will.
you are no one to decide that.

The fact is, Street Fighter IV is the best overall current fighting game at this point, with a great variety of playable characters at the high levels, a great level amount of strategy vs strategy, there is no broken characters, nor are their any broken moves or what not within the game of Street Fighter IV.

its not a fact. its an opinion. get real.

If you can't zone, you will die, if you don't know how to avoid fireballs you will die (<--- something you obviously haven't learned yet), if you don't know your footsie games, you will die, if you don't know your mixups, cross ups, you will die, if you don't know how to set up your Ultra's, or know how to burn meter effectively you will die. There is nothing remotely terrible about the game of Street Fighter IV, when in contrast to the majority of 1st installment SF games, this is the best one with the most balanced roster.

i found the repackaged characters boring
i found the stale graphics shit
i found the character design to be fugly
i found the physics of the game lame
i found the fact that the characters still don't have new moves annoying
i found the alternate outfits unimaginative and dull
i found the anime openings dull and badly drawn.
i found the new characters to be shit
i found Seth a lame boss and pretty broken. beatable. but broken
i found the fact that most of the characters only have 2 specials to be a stepbackwards in time
i found the game to be nothing new (my main complaint)
you see? its all subjective. also, all the things you've said about the gameplay apply to the previous SF's too (except maybe SF3). besides saving and revenge and all that jazz, this game is offering nothing new. that's my complaint. and no parry system...which made SF3 the game it was.

and as for the fireballs, i've said before that i find it cheap. now unless you're a moron, i suggest you stop making me repeat myself.

Again, when you accumilate all of this together and someone such as yourself claims "This game is garbage, blah, blah, so cheap, blah blah."

and when you accumilate all the stuff i said above, you can see why people might feel like agreeing with me. look at this thread. there are enough people going around agreeing with me. you just don't seem to ge the idea of subjectivity. wiki it. it'll help.

Yes, everyone who has proper, and well develop knowledge of SF:IV will tell you that you probably spent a total of 15 minutes on the game, because nobody will a great amount of time spent on it would say so otherwise.

yet i said i've beaten the game on more than one occassion. yet i said i've played it with friends on Xbox360. yet i said i played SF4 at the arcades many times. what part of that doesn't get through your skull? honestly?

Also, if you didn't like the game of SF:IV, however you made well based arguments for you opinion, with good knowledge of it, then I would respect that, however the comments of "Seth is broken" "Tiger, Tiger, Tiger Uppercut...So Cheap?!" don't hold any water for an opinion, other then you never played the game well enough to make a solid one in the first place.

listed everything on top, boy. the tiger bit wasn't a complaint about SF4 but about Sagat in general, something Nemebro started btw. obviously you don't get simple english 😂

honestly, I don't hate you

its a videogame. there's no love hate involved...unless you're taking this way too seriously. grow up, dude, hate and love don't belong in VG thread 😂

however you need to man up, and simply except, your not as well knowledge about this game as you'd like to believe. With that said, Street Fighter IV is an awesome game, and let's stop derailing this thread, and pertain it only to Street Fighter IV.

you can like a game for whatever reason. art, design, replay value etc all of these things count. maybe you ought to understand that not everyone looks for the same things as you in the game. and none of that makes your opinion better than anyone elses. like i said, everyone judges a game differently.
you like the returning cast? cool. i don't. you like the graphics? cool. i don't. you like the sameoldshit gameplay? cool. i don't.

PS: I still want to play you on Mame or GGPO in Street Fighter, I'll send you a PM.

....not a console person. never bought one since the family console. simple english, mate.

~Sadoa

You're absolute scum and a god damned liar. How the hell can you comment on the game if you don't even own a home version and refuse to name any arcades? Get the **** out, you scrubby ass fanboy.

= shit
😆

Originally posted by JustFrame
The relative similarities between characters in SF:IV is actually quite small, and I'm sure the multiple Shoto's is usually the most pointed at culprits, however their gameplays between one another are very, very unique in large ways.

Consider me for example, I have played Ryu nearly throughout my entire SF "life" if you will. However switching between Ryu to Ken to this day is like switching from one character to a completely different one in many cases, due to the fact that my strategy vs strategy for Ryu in many cases will not work in the same factor for Ken (the only similarity they do share is that their footsie game is slightly the same however Ryu's Hadouken, and Ken's poking options with his long range kicks also changes things up differently). The move-sets maybe the same in a few places, such as Hadouken, Shoryuken, Hurricane Kick. However the properties on them are drastic, in frame advantages/disadvantages, and even unique attacks only for that said character.

If I were to use Ken or Gouki instead of Ryu up against solid level players like myself, I will flat out play worse, because overall they are too different from one another to utilize the same options. Obviously the fact that I may not play them as well as Ryu, however their overall gameplan is very unique from one another that the differentials are large enough to separate the strategical aspects to win.

So although I agree that they may share some similarities, their playstyle being is the true separation in their cases, and even Sakura the other "Shoto" character is the most unique out of them all. This same case can also be applied to another game such as Tekken for example to where you have Jin, Heihachi, and Kazuya, all of whom are Mishima's and they all have some moves that are the same, however the differentials in which they play are vastly different from one another that if you played one, and went to the other, it would almost feel as though you were taking a first step again.

Also, I wasn't more clear on my statement of SF:IV, because overall, it is arguably the most played current fighting game on a global scale in contrast to other current new fighting games today on a competitive level. Although this usually isn't the right way to judge a fighting game however the strategical value of SF:IV is very high (Still not as good as SFII, but it's definitely 100x better then the last installment, the SFIII series), and with that acclamation gives it more credibility.

I agree, playing footsies isn't for everyone (absolute nightmare to truly master, I've been playing for years, and my Ryu footsie game never reach super elite level😠 ) , and I enjoy this far more then anything else on a fighting game, because it's way more methodical in most cases, due to the fact that it isn't a pure "let's just rushdown" mentality. Not everyone in SF:IV relies on footsies, some are dominant rushdown/mixup characters (Viper, Blanka), others whom are dominant footsies (Ryu), and you've got your zone you to death characters (Sagat). Tons of character variety in here, so nobody is left behind on what mentality they want to play like, which is another gem for any fighting game enthusiast.

I get where you are coming from. From firsthand knowledge I can tell you I understand that a Cammy matchup against Ryu is tons different from another shota (Sakura for example). But I think the way Street Fighter ended out was lazy and stupid. It just feels like they didn't go the extra mile and make big differences.

Look at (I know I've been hyping this game too much, but) BlazBlue for example. I know the cast is small (Every first fighter has a small cast), but no two characters even look the same. Even the zoning/projectile characters don't have similar projectiles. Rachel and v-13 for example. Rachel sets up traps and Nu is more aggressive. Too many characters have the same projectile in SF. Yes I acknowledge they are somewhat different.

"i found Seth a lame boss and pretty broken. beatable. but broken"

Please just shut up. We already proved you wrong on this and countless other things. There's only so much BS you can spew before people have had enough. 👇

Well he is definately right about Seth being lame.

That's arguable. I don't care about that at all. I care about his claiming Seth is broken. That's an outright lie.

Originally posted by Sado22
hey... 🙁

~Sadoa

Now Now I never said to ignore you or anything. Just to not take the "Yeah Ken is a lame-o who stalks schoolgirls while Ryu is even worse than Michael Jackson having no life what-so-ever" comments too serious.

hug