Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: State of the Fighting Game
Quote:
Originally posted by negitoro
But you have to admit, the features introduced back then, changed the game... and it did so far more rapidly and with greater innovation. Combos, chains, super bars... together with SNK, they pretty much defined what the modern fighting game is about.
Of course they did, they were basically creating the genre right in front of us. Now it's more about adding to that and building it up, not re-doing everything.
Quote:
But since then, Capcom seems perfectly content to rehash endlessly. There haven't been innovations. From SFIII to SFIII:3S, did we really get any innovation ? SFA to SFA3 ? XmenvSF to MvC2 ? Really, the innovations haven't been exactly gushing out.
Excluding the Crossover series, Capcom introduces a game and then works on fine-tuning it. SFA->SFA3 was an evolution, SFIII->SFIII:TS was an evolution, SFII->whatever they finally ended up with was an evolution. Was SFIII:NG more innovative then TS? Unarguably. Does NG play half as well as TS? Not even close.
Without fine-tuning innovation is useless. Ask most people about Stretch Panic for a shining (albiet non-fighting game) example. I actually like the game, but that's not to say it couldn't be way better.
Quote:
Well, you can't just blame SNK. Certainly, they've added their own touches thru the years. I mean didn't supers appear in Fatal Fury before Street Fighter ? And they added the defensive evasion, rolls and controllable jumps.
Whoops, got me there. :)
Quote:
Regardless, the last few years have been relatively dry of innovations.
What new games have we really had since GGX and SFIII:TS? Capcom's done some rehashing for a quick buck, but there hasn't been anything new to push it forward, either. I stand by something new coming with the next chapter of 2D fighting, provided it arrives.
Heh, maybe Samurai Showdown V will add something.