So now, years later, can we all agree KOF98 was the best one?

NGCDFreak said:

KOF 02 all day.

Click to expand...

Kerri369 said:

KOF '98 all day!

Click to expand...

you're both right.

KOF 00!!

Lukejaywalker23 said:

KOF 00!!

Click to expand...

i love 00. from all the striker characters, to the intro. 00 also has some of my favourite endings.

bogard said:

i love 00. from all the striker characters, to the intro. 00 also has some of my favourite endings.

Click to expand...

The intros were sick

Lukejaywalker23 said:

The intros were sick

Click to expand...

Intro

I have very very strong opinions about this, and KoF '02 is definitely definitely the best (power gauge shenanigans are good time), followed by '98, followed by '00. Anyone have any idea why the even numbered KoF games were always the best? Were they switching dev teams or something?

Also whoever is comparing Samurai Showdown to SFII on that last page is ridiculous, the gameplay is obscenely different. Last I remember you don't die in like 3 hits in SF like you do in SS. Street fighter 2 is a game of comboing your opponent, Samurai Showdown II is about smacking the other guy with a fucking sword for half his health. I think the 6 buttons is the only similarity I can think of.

You're right damage looks noooothing alike.

I think he's referring to single hit damages.

One heavy slash could take away half of his opponent's health, in SF2 a Fierce or Roundhouse can take a fourth at best.

Also, remember that combos weren't an intended mechanic in SF2, but rather a side effect of how hit stun and recovery worked in the game.

The SSF2T example doesn't have a place in this, since it's a completely different game from the original SF2.

Lukejaywalker23 said:

KOF 00!!

Click to expand...

Great fkn game.what part of Houston you on man? You play on cab, console of emulator?

You're right damage looks noooothing alike. [/QUOTE]

I don't know what you're trying to prove but looking at those videos I see damages that look nothing alike, every hit in Samurai Showodown is doing way more damage

No, Samurai Shodown 2 doesn't take off halves. It takes quarters. The only way it can get worse depending on the character is if you get it on a counter. Same as Street Fighter II Turbo and Super Street Fighter II Turbo. Depending on the attack used both hit up to quarters. Now Samurai Shodown 2 had more characters that hit the quarters, but the recovery on it is also very bad. Very similar to ST or HF for the characters that accomplish that. If you watch the matches. All 3 last about the same and if we are talking about combos dropping energy Blanka 2 hit dropping almost half on a fierce punch and a roll at 25 seconds into the second video doesn't make me think the damage scaling is that much different. Watch Balrog do a headbutt at 7:59 and watch the energy fly out. It can be over 40% just on a throw basically. Yeah totally different.

If you want to talk about the differences about the 2 brands. SF2 in general is very fireball happy. Meaning most of the matches out there is watching some guy throwing hadokens all day. Where as Samurai Shodown gave options to get around fireballs.

Samurai Shodown also has parries, run, blood, and Fatalities (like MK since that was a SF competition as well). However Samurai Shodown wasn't trying to be the same as Street Fighter II. There were plenty of clones out there. Samurai Shodown was trying to be the main competition for Street Fighter II. To do that you had to give the audience something different while being similar enough to jump in and feel comfortable playing it. Samurai Shodown accomplished it.

If there's not enough combos for you try this one.

That ukyo strat is so broken lol

It reminds me a lot of Boxer's B.S..

AJtheMishima said:

Great fkn game.what part of Houston you on man? You play on cab, console of emulator?

Click to expand...

I'm up by lake conroe. I just got a CMVS set up. Where are you?

I can see the similarities to SFII turbo I suppose, but I really don't think that Samurai Showdown II was trying to be the main competition any more than, say, KoF '94 or art of Fighting 2. It came out way to late to be a response to vanilla SFII, and number of buttons aside (and perhaps I'm just being super dense here), it seems like SSII is no more similar to SFIIturbo than other contemporary SNK fighters

Samurai Shodown I and II definitely had Street Fighter II basic mechanics in mind when they made it. Look at Samurai Shodown 3-6 and it really plays nothing like SFII or any Street Fighter after. Why? Because they were done trying to worry about it IMO. They wanted to make their own game. Early 90's fighters relied on the SF formula too much and most got thrown to the way side as bad knock offs. In all honesty Fatal Fury suffered the same fate as well early on. That's why by the mid 90's many of the 2d fighters tried something different because SF clones aren't that popular.

Forgot

HF released Dec '92 SS1 was July '93
ST released in Feb '94. SSII was Oct '94. Plenty of time to make a response game for back in the day.

So now, years later, can we all agree KOF98 was the best one? Whole ten pages of this thread can neither confirm nor deny...

Mean, technically any fighter produced during that era was supposed to be direct competition to SF. SF was the coke and the rest were pepsi. But SS did spice familiar elements from sf up abit. But all in all SNK was known by most capcom players as the Clone Company.

Lukejaywalker23 said:

I'm up by lake conroe. I just got a CMVS set up. Where are you?

Click to expand...

I have a big red, right now im off 290 and Gessner. In acouple weeks though ill be by Bltwy8 and I10 right by memorial city mall.
MCP baby!!!!(Memorial City Playas) Name of our Tekken Tag 1 crew back in the day. lol

oliverclaude said:

So now, years later, can we all agree KOF98 was the best one? Whole ten pages of this thread can neither confirm nor deny...

Click to expand...

We can agree that the majority agrees 98 was the best, then a close following of 02 after that i would say 97 and 00 tie for third

Mr Bakaboy said:

Samurai Shodown I and II definitely had Street Fighter II basic mechanics in mind when they made it. Look at Samurai Shodown 3-6 and it really plays nothing like SFII or any Street Fighter after. Why? Because they were done trying to worry about it IMO. They wanted to make their own game. Early 90's fighters relied on the SF formula too much and most got thrown to the way side as bad knock offs. In all honesty Fatal Fury suffered the same fate as well early on. That's why by the mid 90's many of the 2d fighters tried something different because SF clones aren't that popular.

Forgot

HF released Dec '92 SS1 was July '93
ST released in Feb '94. SSII was Oct '94. Plenty of time to make a response game for back in the day.

Click to expand...

I had fatal fury in mind when I mentioned other contemporary SNK fighters, if you want to argue that Fatal fury and Art of Fighters are responses to HF and that SSII and KoF '94 are responses to ST I can't really argue, but all I was saying is that every tournament fighter around that time was trying to do the SFII thing, and that SS is not, by itself, SNKs only and specific response to SFII

oliverclaude said:

So now, years later, can we all agree KOF98 was the best one? Whole ten pages of this thread can neither confirm nor deny...

Click to expand...

God no, it's clearly '02

Well anything a company puts out is supposed to do good. My point was SS wasn't just a clone. Technically FF wasn't either since the creator didn't even try to, but the final bosses in FF2 being ridiculously similar to SFII is hard to deny. SS was a game that was well thought out and well put together. I'm sure they knew what they had on their hands considering Fatal Fury and Samurai Shodown got the most support early on from a media aspect (anime). IMO FF2 was the 1st time they tried to compete and failed because it was too similar even though it was from a new character standpoint, but wasn't from a play style standpoint. SS was the 2nd time and they succeeded from a financial standpoint.

oliverclaude said:

So now, years later, can we all agree KOF98 was the best one? Whole ten pages of this thread can neither confirm nor deny...

Click to expand...

Read the 1st seven pages. Everybody already commented about it before. Right now it's just derailing a thread that's already played out.

Im not saying it is a clone, just the SF crowd all saw everything as a copy due to fanboyism. I see the differences and appreciate them. While in direct competition they did not rip off sf in the sense that it was the same just different animations/characters.

Bakaboy I don't even understand what you're arguing right now, first you say that SS is SNKs "version" of SFII (but not a clone and with it's own unique mechanics?) with your basis being that the combos and gameplay are similar (which they really aren't at all) and they have the same number of buttons. And when it's pointed out that other SNK games have as similar gameplay (fatal fury) you start talking about financial success, which I fail to see the relevance of at all. You keep subtly changing your position, saying that the SS series is capcom's version of SFII but conceding that it has it's own mechanics and other capcom games were equally as similar, and I guess I want to know exactly, in clear terms, what you mean when you say that "Technically Samurai Shodown (especially SS2 vs ST) is the SNK version of Street Fighter II.". Like I can't properly debate this if I don't know what you're trying to posit

To sum it up quickly because tired of long winded explanations

Fatal Fury 2: Different Gamplay + Similar Characters = Fail ( Bad Clone)

Samurai Shodown: Similar Gameplay + Different Characters = Success