<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Ryoandr:
would SNK had been without Capcom...
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PrOzErG:
Yes but did you notice Capcom has many look alike char's ?? Like Dan Ryu Ken Akuma ?? They all have the same outfit that's not original you see they just changed the color's of the outfit and changed the head of the char and the move's did you see Snk char's like that ??
Certainly...
Vice & Mature -- KoF '96
Ralf & Clark -- KoF '95
Ryo & Takuma -- KoF '95
--Riot--
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by PrOzErG:
HHMMM....... You mean were would Capcom been without Snk......................
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by RiotoftheBlood:
No... you are wrong. SNK hired away many of Capcom's developers, and that's when they started to become good. It's no coincidence. I'll concede that having competition from SNK definitely made Capcom better, but there's no way that you can tell me honestly that Capcom depends or did depend on SNK.
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Apathy Wind:
Bufa: You make some interesting points but you can't really compare a serious fighter like KoF to flash fighters like MvC2. Serious Capcom fighters (ala SF) have a much deeper learning curve then the VS. games. Hell, programming my VCR has a higher learning curve then MvC2.
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bufa:
are you saying you can make your VCR clock tell the proper time?ooooooohhhhh...![]()
yeah, i guess you can't. (i knew i was being biased somewhere.)im just trying to say that MvC2 is about visually giving the player a euphoric high, while KoF is more about gameplay equality. that's unfair, i guess, putting Capcom's flagship as MvsC2. oops.![]()
![]()
let me demonstrate in a poorly drawn picture, illustrating the importance of each aspect.
Eye-candy-----------50-----------Gameplay
__A____________B_________C_____
[_______________________________]
A: Marvel vs Capcom 2
B: Street Fighter Alpha
C: King of Fighters
Marvel vs Capcom 2 is just completely based on visual effects. i think nearly everybody agrees with me there, the learning curve is aimed at the more un-coordinated, basic gamers.
SF Alpha still has it's gameplay aspects, Alpha counters, for example. the SFA series cheap-bastard prevention device. I'm putting it closer to the centre because it's the sprite art is 'cleaner' than KoF's. any ignorant capcommunist that argues SFA plays better than KoF is just completely off.
KoF is not at the very end of the spectrum, we aren't playing Stickman 2: Hyper Fighting, fer god sakes.
i'm still wondering where i could put Street Fighter 3 and Garou:MotW. they succeed in both areas of criteria.
i'm done rambling.
[edited to fix fugly diagram]
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Bufa:
are you saying you can make your VCR clock tell the proper time?ooooooohhhhh...![]()
yeah, i guess you can't. (i knew i was being biased somewhere.)im just trying to say that MvC2 is about visually giving the player a euphoric high, while KoF is more about gameplay equality. that's unfair, i guess, putting Capcom's flagship as MvsC2. oops.![]()
![]()
let me demonstrate in a poorly drawn picture, illustrating the importance of each aspect.
Eye-candy-----------50-----------Gameplay
__A____________B_________C_____
[_______________________________]
A: Marvel vs Capcom 2
B: Street Fighter Alpha
C: King of Fighters
Marvel vs Capcom 2 is just completely based on visual effects. i think nearly everybody agrees with me there, the learning curve is aimed at the more un-coordinated, basic gamers.
SF Alpha still has it's gameplay aspects, Alpha counters, for example. the SFA series cheap-bastard prevention device. I'm putting it closer to the centre because it's the sprite art is 'cleaner' than KoF's. any ignorant capcommunist that argues SFA plays better than KoF is just completely off.
KoF is not at the very end of the spectrum, we aren't playing Stickman 2: Hyper Fighting, fer god sakes.
i'm still wondering where i could put Street Fighter 3 and Garou:MotW. they succeed in both areas of criteria.
i'm done rambling.
[edited to fix fugly diagram]
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by chohan:
Riot SNK has some ''look alike'' fighters but those are just pares of two. Streetfighter has; Ryu,Ken,Dan,Akuma,Sakura,Evil Ryu. It is just driving me crazy. They all do the same exept for very little differentces. Look at there feets for example, all there feets are the same. And then you got Cammy and those two copies Juli and Juni. I liked Streetfighter better when there weren't so many same styled characters. Just with the old 16 basic fighters. Still ofcource Streetfighter is a great fighting game.
Cho
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by RiotoftheBlood:
I can't believe that you included Sakura there. Sakura is way more different from any of the shotos than any of the pairs I mentioned are. And you can't really count Dan, because he was a blatant joke of Ryo, who was a blatant copy of Ryu (and anyone who doesn't think so is way too SNK-jaded).
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Krusader:
I thought it was proved a while ago that both Street Fighter and Art of Fighting were created by the same guy.
The man behind SF2 left Capcom right after and joined SNK, which then made AOF. Nothing is ripped off since its the same guy's work. It's as futile as saying Chrono Trigger's art is a blatant copy of Dragon Ball Z.