I'm looking to buy a new KOF. Last year when KOF 2k1 went into the arcade, everybody on this board (almost) were jumping on it saying how great it was and how bad 2k was. Now, all I see is how 2k1 sucks and how 2k2 will be so much better. So my question is should I even bother buying either one??
KOF 2k or 2k1?
- Thread starter NickD
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2001
- Posts
- 13,454
i hate 2001.
i never did change my mind.
i always thought 2000 was a great kof.
the strikers can be cheap but
not regarding the strikers its the sharpest playing
kof i think.
the musics good.
the backgrounds vary but i like them.
the presentation was fantastic.
and where it left off story wise left lots of
very cool and interesting possiblities.
2k1 dropped the ball on all the aforementioned
points i just made.
people say it plays better
and the gameplay is more exact.
i think not.
the timing is changed for most of the characters.
moves are done with different motions
because i suppose to keep it "fresh"
the wire system sucks.
and i dont care who you talk to, but the ratio system sucks.
there is no reason why you should have to pick
2 characters instead of 3 when fighting a boss.
if you can beat the bosses with 3-4 characters then congratulations.
but ratios in real player on player fights are dumb too.
i also hate the music, the art, and definitely the story.
you know.
the lovable igniz and all.
dumb shit.
2000 is a better kof all the way.
2001 is interesting for its new characters
which dont really fit, but are cool anyways.
and the canceling system you can pull when fighting.
but thats about it.
i never did change my mind.
i always thought 2000 was a great kof.
the strikers can be cheap but
not regarding the strikers its the sharpest playing
kof i think.
the musics good.
the backgrounds vary but i like them.
the presentation was fantastic.
and where it left off story wise left lots of
very cool and interesting possiblities.
2k1 dropped the ball on all the aforementioned
points i just made.
people say it plays better
and the gameplay is more exact.
i think not.
the timing is changed for most of the characters.
moves are done with different motions
because i suppose to keep it "fresh"
the wire system sucks.
and i dont care who you talk to, but the ratio system sucks.
there is no reason why you should have to pick
2 characters instead of 3 when fighting a boss.
if you can beat the bosses with 3-4 characters then congratulations.
but ratios in real player on player fights are dumb too.
i also hate the music, the art, and definitely the story.
you know.
the lovable igniz and all.
dumb shit.
2000 is a better kof all the way.
2001 is interesting for its new characters
which dont really fit, but are cool anyways.
and the canceling system you can pull when fighting.
but thats about it.
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2000
- Posts
- 60,434
They're both good.
Igniz theme is one of the best final boss themes ever. (next to Kouryu in LB2)
Igniz theme is one of the best final boss themes ever. (next to Kouryu in LB2)
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2001
- Posts
- 9,422
I would get the KOF2k first. Then 2k1. I just played 2000 for the first time on an MVS machine on the college campus the other day. I was pleasantly surprised at how good it was. I enjoyed it so much more than 1999. Sorry but I've never really been able to get into '99. I think KOF 2000 has a rather good character selection. Yes there are the shit people like Bao, etc. But I think it is a solid game. I don't mind the strikers in it really at all. It was fun getting to see Geese Howard again even though he is just a striker. 
I loved the character art and selection screen. Simply awesome IMO. I think it is a great title which got bashed too much originally. Seems more people have been accepting of it. I plan on getting it soon as I can, and before 2k1.
I loved the character art and selection screen. Simply awesome IMO. I think it is a great title which got bashed too much originally. Seems more people have been accepting of it. I plan on getting it soon as I can, and before 2k1.Thanks for your replies. I don't really care about strikers, when I play 99, I never use them so in or out I don't care. I'm more looking in playability and good looking bg and music so I think I should go with 2k. The main reason I liked 99 was because of the updated Clark moves and the backgrounds were nicely drawn (especially the stage with the rain falling)
Originally posted by Lord Wolfgang Krauser:
<strong>98 is your best bet.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Already have it
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2002
- Posts
- 283
2k all the way for me, feels more like a real kof....
1
10 in 2010
Guest
In KOF 2000 you must need strikers in order to be a good player, they play a big role in that game and that's the gimmick. If they took out the strikers from KOF 2000 it would be very plain, like a scaled down 97 with more characters?
I would go for KOF 2001, it feels very fresh and it´s alsos the best KOF to date IMHO. The backgrounds don´t suck, well, some of them do, but overall they´re OK. The music is pretty good actually, but most people want the old themes repeated in every game.
KOF 2001 is a great game, look at reviews and they will tell you something...
I would go for KOF 2001, it feels very fresh and it´s alsos the best KOF to date IMHO. The backgrounds don´t suck, well, some of them do, but overall they´re OK. The music is pretty good actually, but most people want the old themes repeated in every game.
KOF 2001 is a great game, look at reviews and they will tell you something...
- Joined
- Apr 20, 2002
- Posts
- 3,669
My preference is slightly towards 2K1, but you really can't go wrong with either, both are great games in my opinion. You could buy either one (or both) and be happy.
Giga Power
Host for Orochi,
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2001
- Posts
- 1,085
lol. 2k was the worst KoF. The artwork in it was fucking awesome. But it feels like a damn Capcom game with all of the focus on strikers. In 99 and 2k1 strikers are an option, in 2k they're center stage. The game has it's appeal but it's not 2k1 game play wise. But that's just how I feel, I would suggest a way to try and play both.
T
Takuma79
Guest
I'll probably get ripped into for this, but i say 2k1, I like the 4 on 4, with the ability to choose how many strikers you want, vs if you want a striker at all, I don't care much for the game's music though, but i do like some of the BGs. as for 2k i haven't played the aes, but i have the DC version and i'll agree that its a good game, but i don't like it as much as i like 2k1
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2002
- Posts
- 6,724
just to clear things here:
both of them are great and considered the real KOFs to me
KOF 2000:
-needs timing skills
-depends on the strikers
-better art works and BGs
KOF 2001:
-needs fast hands skills (pulling moves to cancel others)
-more characters
-faster gameplay
-more moves and combos to spend time learning them (about 2~3 times more ........ no joking)
personally I prefer 2k1 and if you are able to buy one just do it ....... you'll need to see combo movies to really enjoy them
both of them are great and considered the real KOFs to me
KOF 2000:
-needs timing skills
-depends on the strikers
-better art works and BGs
KOF 2001:
-needs fast hands skills (pulling moves to cancel others)
-more characters
-faster gameplay
-more moves and combos to spend time learning them (about 2~3 times more ........ no joking)
personally I prefer 2k1 and if you are able to buy one just do it ....... you'll need to see combo movies to really enjoy them
Ok, now I'm really confused 
. Seriously, why did a lot of you guys (including me) were drooling over 2k1 then when I come back here (7 months later 
) 2k1 is considered lame. When I was asking the same question last year about 2k or 2k1 (at 800$) I got the reply, let 2k1 drop and buy it instead of 2k which is total garbage. I never had the chance of playing it in the arcade since the Neo is basically dead where I live (apart from Puzzle Bobble). So was it after you played it that you changed your opinions?
. Seriously, why did a lot of you guys (including me) were drooling over 2k1 then when I come back here (7 months later ) 2k1 is considered lame. When I was asking the same question last year about 2k or 2k1 (at 800$) I got the reply, let 2k1 drop and buy it instead of 2k which is total garbage. I never had the chance of playing it in the arcade since the Neo is basically dead where I live (apart from Puzzle Bobble). So was it after you played it that you changed your opinions?Devil_Gans
Bu, ,
- Joined
- May 21, 2001
- Posts
- 4,718
KOF 2000 feels like an SNK game.Sure, the strikers are abusive but it has that same feeling we all come to love.As for 2001, well, it feels a little different but the gameplay still rocks especially those supercancels.Regarding the backgrounds, kof 2k has the upperhand as well as in music, presentation and artwork.KOF 2k also has a deeper pratice mode.
It all comes down to preference.
It all comes down to preference.
I like em both, but you get more GAME for your buck out of 2K1. More combo's, more moves and more change. I mean, 2K is great, but it's a polish of KOF formula, while 2K1 introduces new play style while retaining the familiarity that is KOF. Sure, there is some roughness to the graphics and such, but the gameplay is solid and there are some great new characters to mess with and hav fun learning (Angel, to be specific).
I don't know...yoiu can't go wrong with either..It's KOF!
I don't know...yoiu can't go wrong with either..It's KOF!
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2002
- Posts
- 6,724
everyone here comparing KOFs according to graphics ,BGs ,musics ,art works ,........
to me ,KOF is all about gameplay nothing else ,all KOFs graphics are in the same level,and I don't care for other stuff like BGs and musics
I don't know how some say that KOF99 is better than KOF2000 ........ I mean ,every thing you do in 99 can be done in 2000 so how come 99 become better .......... is it the graphics or the backgrounds? you can find other games that have better BGs or grafix (GG X)........does that mean that they are better than all KOFs?
remember this is an opinion not a fact (well ...... maybe
)
to me ,KOF is all about gameplay nothing else ,all KOFs graphics are in the same level,and I don't care for other stuff like BGs and musics
I don't know how some say that KOF99 is better than KOF2000 ........ I mean ,every thing you do in 99 can be done in 2000 so how come 99 become better .......... is it the graphics or the backgrounds? you can find other games that have better BGs or grafix (GG X)........does that mean that they are better than all KOFs?
remember this is an opinion not a fact (well ...... maybe
)