| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| DKW
163th Post
 
Regular Customer
   
|  "Here we go again..."
, posted Thu 26 Sep 00:16
...ah, forget it. Some things are beyond evey my comprehension.
Here's all you need to know, really:
* The idea that every game HAD to have ONE and ONLY ONE winner according to a PRESCRIBED, FIXED CHAIN OF EVENTS did not exist at the time of SF2, let alone SF1. What Capcom was doing at the time was trying to create popular characters that people would pick and plausible backstories for each of them. They succeeded in this regard, and so righfully believed that they did a good job.
* Someone at the Japanese branch failed to take into account that someone at the American branch would be queasy at the idea of a character named Mike Bison, and for some reason the American branch didn't just name him Mike, like they did for SF1. Of course, they had no way of knowing that the characters whose names they shuffled would still be around over a decade after SF2, so the shuffle was made, and they've become so famous under said names that there's no way COA can correct this mistake now.
* Capcom has never, never, never, ever, EVER given a crap about "tiers" or who is "really" more powerful than whom in some vaguely-defined "story". Their concerns are making the playable characters as balanced as possible and making them appealing choices to play as. They'll do whatever it takes to achieve both (hence Akuma taking damage like a little girl). As such, there are no definite or set ability levels for ANYONE.
* Re. SFA: Their first mistake was making SFA1 a prequel. I'm sorry, but this never works. Their second mistake was making SFA2 a kinda-sorta "replacement" for SFA1, which is bad enough in itself, but they didn't make it definite, which turned the whole franchise into an absolute disaster. The third mistake was not knowing what the hell to do with SFA3, with the result being that many gamers will scream to the high heavens that a game with a plethora of characters who never appear at all in the main line is a prequel to said line, while others insist that, while they have absolutely no idea when it happens, it's definitely a replacement for one of the other games. Pure madness. Had Capcom thrown out the prequel nonsense and marketed SFA as a companion line to SF...which it very plainly was...there'd be no problems. But they somehow felt the need to explain how Ryu got a freaking red headband (we're nowhere near settled on THAT little gem, BTW), and look at the total mess that resulted. Anyone who claims to be able to make sense of SFA continuuity is dreaming.
* Dan Hibiki was a silly prank that spiralled horribly out of control, and now he's developed a fan base and Capcom can't get rid of him. No one gave a crap about Ryo or Robert's ripoff-ness, and it certainly isn't an issue now, with everyone in the Kyokugenryu stable fighting a completely different style than in AOF1. Need I even mention that that series has been dead for about seven years?
* The reason Sakura Kasugano took over a decade to graduate from high school isn't because she's a worse student than Kyo Kusanagi. It's becuase the Japanese contingent absolutely adored that cute little uniform...that's why she never took it off even during summer vacation...and couldn't bear for her to reach an age where she didn't need it. Hey, don't look at me, I couldn't make this lunacy up if I tried. Since Sakura really isn't that important a character, why Capcom didn't just replace her with some other random teenage girly-girl has always been a mystery to me.
* You can make anything of SF3 that you want, because it has absolutely NO connection to anything that's come before. Yes, Urien mentions "the legs that brought down an organization", but that was well in the past, and certainly isn't an impetus for anything Ms. Xiang's doing in Third Strike. The only SF3 alums that made it to future games are Yun and Alex, the former a cocky, fun-loving teenager making an honest living with his skills and the latter a somewhat angsty ex-soldier who seeks meaning in battle, so they're definitely no threat to tangle up any existing storylines.
* The whole Rose situation is exactly why console RPG fanatics should not design fighting games. Few things in a fighting game are more depressing than a completely unavoidable, irreversible death that happens for no good reason...especially when the game doesn't even bother to make it clear how the victim met her demise.
* And the lesson they undoubtedly learned from Charlie is this: If you want someone who supposedly died in the past to stay dead, don't actually put him in the game, because there's the chance either he'll get popular or you'll want to use him again. You almost have to feel sorry for the morass they've put themselves in...they clearly like the guy and don't ever want to do away with him for good, but he's technically "dead", so they can never use him in full capacity. The result being they have to make up all kinds of qualifiers and conditions and bits and tweaks and slips and flips just to accomodate him.
* The expression "Dream Match" has no meaning in SF. Everything can be said to have happened, or possibly happened, in some capacity. Actually, you only run into real conflicts with SFA, and that's a mess unto itself, so it's really no big deal. The problem with designating a game a Dream Match is that, in effect, you set the game apart from your "normal" games...hence establish what you absolutely cannot have in your original line. "Oh, no, he was in the DREAM MATCH, meaning he really is dead, so we're definitely not bringing him back in the real game!" If there's one thing Capcom will never do, is set arbitrary limits on who they can put in the game. If they want Charlie and M.Bison (Vega) in the game, they're in. No explanations, no excuses. They're just plain up and ready to rumble. This total creative freedom is almost certainly why Capcom has never designed the reality or unreality of any of their games, which was definitely a wise decision on their part.
* The whole business with the "final portable system SF2" with the updated-for-the-new-millennium endings underscores why retroactive continuuity simply doesn't work. At any rate, the majority of the endings weren't changed at all, which leads one to ask why they even bothered.
* Whenever reading any of the definitive SF story FAQs, keep in mind that a ton of it brings up issues which did not exist for a considerable part of SF's existence. Capcom did not give a damn about annoinging one winner for every tournament, and they had no ludicrous notions about dead being forever ("Hey, who's that woman standing next to Dudley and the Kanes?"). So there will never be anything that'll satisfy everybody. (Okay, there probably won't be for KOF either, but there isn't a chance in hell with SF.)
* They should've sent Poison to the big red light district in the sky and replaced her with a normal woman. Damn unoriginality. Since when did they care about that, anyway? 
homepage - http://home.hawaii.rr.com/dkwff
|
| Radish 360th Post
Silver Customer
  
| "Re(4):Here we go again..." , posted Thu 26 Sep 08:41
quote:
The plot of the SF games? Ryu and some other people get together and fight it out. Yay! While I give credit to TiamatRoar and others who have taken a Sisyphus-like task upon themselves in trying to sort out the confusion of the SF story line I sort of doubt the people at Capcom who make the games know or care how all the pieces of the story fit together. I agree with the people who have said that the SF games are more concerned with making characters you either identify with or are otherwise interested in instead of trying to tie 30, 40, 50 or more different character stories together into one over- riding story that may or may not make any sense. This also means that, incredibly, every ending is valid so when you play through a game of SF you have seen the "true" ending at that moment plus, since the character is serving as an extension of the player, it means that the true winner of the SF games is you, the person playing the game. Yay!
A winner is you! (sorry 'bout that.)
But back on topic, I agree that the Street Fighter series is more preoccupied with the characters themselves and not their plots. Many of the character's ending come true so there really is no one 'real' ending.
My take is that while I like my fighting games to have some kind of explantation to the masses, I don't think it's wise to get hung up on plot inconsistencies.
|
| Ultima 284th Post
Copper Customer
| "Re(1):Here we go again..." , posted Thu 26 Sep 09:29
To DKW:
Some corrections. Okay, MANY corrections:
> Here's all you need to know, really:
> The idea that every game HAD to have ONE and ONLY ONE winner according to a PRESCRIBED, FIXED CHAIN OF EVENTS did not exist at the time of SF2, let alone SF1.
Not exactly. They've long said Ryu won SF1. They've also said that Alex won SF3. The only one in dispute is SF2, which I think not even Capcom knows who won.
[name changes]
Totally irrelevant. The names are altered, that's all you need to know. Ignoring all the BS Capcom USA makes up on the fly, the characters' stories are unchanged.
> * Capcom has never, never, never, ever, EVER given a crap about "tiers" or who is "really" more powerful than whom in some vaguely-defined "story".
In terms of gameplay, they don't care (for the most part - Dan is obviously made to suck most of the time). For the sake of their own story, they do care. Otherwise, they wouldn't bother to have created any kind of story tidbits for their characters at *all*. They would be even greater ciphers than the VF or DoA cast.
> Re. SFA: Their first mistake was making SFA1 a prequel. I'm sorry, but this never works.
Not at first. They have retconned things to fit more appropriately. I suspect that Alpha wasn't meant to be canon at first, but they changed their minds later. Hey, it's their game; they have the right to change their minds when they want.
> Their second mistake was making SFA2 a kinda-sorta "replacement" for SFA1, which is bad enough in itself, but they didn't make it definite, which turned the whole franchise into an absolute disaster.
What do you mean? SFA2 definitely replaces A1, just like Second IMpact replaces New Generation and every subsequent version of SF2 replaced the one before it. Storywise, A1, NG, and the first 4 versions of Sf2 don't exist.
> The third mistake was not knowing what the hell to do with SFA3 [crap deleted]
Actually, by the time of A3, they were quite clear on what they wanted to do and how it tied to SF2. They did cut a few corners though (e.g. they didn't bother recolouring Ryu's headband to it's proper red colour, and they had Juni & Juli clones representing all the dolls)
> Need I even mention that that series has been dead for about seven years?
Need I mention that Dan hasn't appeared in a canon Sf game since A3?
re: Sakura
Sakura has only appeared in two canon games: Alpha 2 and Alpha 3, which take place two years apart. Thank you.
> You can make anything of SF3 that you want, because it has absolutely NO connection to anything that's come before.
True. It has its own story, but it's buried under the mysteriousness that is GIll's motive. The story in Sf3 is both epic and low key.
> The only SF3 alums that made it to future games are Yun and Alex, the former a cocky, fun-loving teenager making an honest living with his skills and the latter a somewhat angsty ex-soldier who seeks meaning in battle, so they're definitely no threat to tangle up any existing storylines.
This is all irrelvent. Storyline wise, the last game in the SF3 series to date is 3rd Strike. Nothing that has come out since then is a part of the SF story. We'd have to wait until SF4 comes out to see if any SF3 characters truly return (unles they decide on making CFAS canon, which I sincerely doubt).
re: Rose
We're still not 100% sure what happened to Rose, so I'll leave that one alone. But it seems that Capcom knew what they were going to do with Rose ahead of time, if that picture of Rose with Bison's cap means anything - it's been around since Alpha 1 I think (it might be from Alpha 2's art, but I can't remember; it doesn't matter, since A2 was released over 2 years before Alpha 3, which is still a long time to foreshadow a character's ultimate fate).
re: Charlie
Chuckles is dead in story. He died in SFA3 (Guile's ending). Storyline wise, he's appeared in only two games as well, same as Sakura. It just seems like more because of the Vs. games, which are a different entity altogether.
> The expression "Dream Match" has no meaning in SF. Everything can be said to have happened, or possibly happened, in some capacity.
Go play the VS. series (Marvel and SNK versions), then get back to me. "Everything can be said to have happened" is obviously bunk, though I believe "some things may have possbly happened" to be correct.
> If there's one thing Capcom will never do, is set arbitrary limits on who they can put in the game. If they want Charlie and M.Bison (Vega) in the game, they're in. No explanations, no excuses. They're just plain up and ready to rumble. This total creative freedom is almost certainly why Capcom has never designed the reality or unreality of any of their games, which was definitely a wise decision on their part.
This isn't entirely correct. Capcom does design the reality or unreality of their games. They just reserve the right to change their minds when they want. Most of the dead characters (namely Charlie) haven't appeared in any of the later SF games (in terms of story, not release date). Actually, I think Charlie and Bison are the only characters confirmed to be dead at this point. Gen and Rose are presumed dead, but it's not certain.
> The whole business with the "final portable system SF2" with the updated-for-the-new-millennium endings underscores why retroactive continuuity simply doesn't work.
Why?
> At any rate, the majority of the endings weren't changed at all, which leads one to ask why they even bothered.
The endings that weren't changed either didn't happen, and/or had no bearing on the overall story so they could have taken place whether or not that character won the tournament.
Actually, the main difference between SF2 now and SF2 when it was first created is that it actually *has* an underlying story to it (not much of one, but something is better than nothing).
> * Whenever reading any of the definitive SF story FAQs, keep in mind that a ton of it brings up issues which did not exist for a considerable part of SF's existence.
Mainly because they didn't think about it, not because they didn't think it was a good idea. See also: Why characters have multiple supers in Alpha games but only one in ST.
> They should've sent Poison to the big red light district in the sky and replaced her with a normal woman. Damn unoriginality. Since when did they care about that, anyway?
No comment.
--
Ultima - The Right arm of Scrub Voltron
http://uramble.com/index.html - U's Rambling Page
|
| CrazyMike
211th Post
Frequent Customer
| "Re(3):Here we go again..." , posted Thu 26 Sep 11:37
Ryu is the gay one, watch Street Fighter V, he would rather be skinny dipping with Ken then staying on a paradise island with Rinko the babe! ahem...
Anyway another thing, I haven't read the FAQ, I feel I do not need to since I understand the story, but how did Street Fighter Alpha 1/2 screw anything up? One thing people fail to realize, Alpha 1/2 isn't even a tournament, there is no set boss, every fighter is just looking to settle some scores, i.e Sodom and Guy, Ryu/Gouki etc. And there is no endings in Alpha 1/2 that conflict with Street Fighter 2's story. The only one that screws up is Alpha 3, unless you want to view it as a "re-interpretation" of SF 2's story so in effect it is just the timeline of SF 2 with red haired Ryu @_@
|
| Iron D 2025th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
    
 
| "Re(4):Here we go again..." , posted Thu 26 Sep 11:57
quote:
Ryu is the gay one, watch Street Fighter V, he would rather be skinny dipping with Ken then staying on a paradise island with Rinko the babe! ahem...
Anyway another thing, I haven't read the FAQ, I feel I do not need to since I understand the story, but how did Street Fighter Alpha 1/2 screw anything up? One thing people fail to realize, Alpha 1/2 isn't even a tournament, there is no set boss, every fighter is just looking to settle some scores, i.e Sodom and Guy, Ryu/Gouki etc. And there is no endings in Alpha 1/2 that conflict with Street Fighter 2's story. The only one that screws up is Alpha 3, unless you want to view it as a "re-interpretation" of SF 2's story so in effect it is just the timeline of SF 2 with red haired Ryu @_@
No, SFA3 comes BEFORE SF2. BEFORE! And it is not the same as SF2 for many reasons. Shall I go into them, or should Ultima and Tiamatroar do the favors?
Useless but true fact: Australian soldiers used "We're Off to See the Wizard" as a marching song during WWII.
|
| DKW
165th Post
Regular Customer
| "Re(2):Here we go again..." , posted Fri 27 Sep 01:28
In reverse order for a change:
Ultima - Okay, I'll level with you; I don't even understand half of what you're trying to argue (I notice you don't actually disagree with me on a lot of stuff  ). Suffice to say that Capcom's always done their own thing, and I doubt anyone on their creative team has given even half as much thought to the grand continuuity as some SF fans.
I don't understand why anyone puts so much emphasis on "canon". It's plainly obvious to me that Capcom simply does not give a damn. Look, it's a big, big world they've created, and from time to time someone has done something they'd rather not deal with later. Bottom line, when you're in the business of selling fighting games to a notoriously fickle fan base, you gotta be flexible, and you can't let petty little concerns like "canon" crimp your style.
Nothing illustrates this better than Charlie, the perfect example of The One They Wish They Could Have Back. The problem with him isn't that he died of course (when it comes to convenient resurrections, Capcom fighters are almost as generous as Ultima Online), it's that he was established as a dead person, and said death was an integral part of the storyline for another character, i.e. Guile. The whole point of his death in SFA1, in fact, was, well, to show how that death happened. Now, if you want to make him a regular, recurring character (and again, it's extremely obvious that Capcom desperately wanted to), it's not simply a matter of waving the Kenny McCormick wand over him; this is a someone who's SUPPOSED to be dead. So they gotta twist things around...oh, this game was in the past. And this game. And this game didn't happen in this universe. And this game was just some programmer's hallucination. You see. Now, the easiest solution (other than making their sorta-Guile character someone OTHER than Charlie) would be to "update" Guile's story a little...say, he thought for sure Charlie was dead, but the tough bastard found a way out. Something like that. But apparently the vengeance angle was so critical to Guile, they couldn't do it. In short, what we have here is one of the few times Capcom tied their hands with a too-restrictive storyline, and a damn fine SFA character suffered for it. That's why they don't make a habit of it.
Oh, and as for designating winners for SF1 and SF3. SF1 had two playable characters, one on the 1P side, one on the 2P. Since the game didn't permit starting on the 2P side, most players played 1P. You do the math. And they could make Ibuki or Twelve the winner of SF3 for all it mattered. I'm willing to accept Alex as the undisputed champ...given how little Gill's defeat means to most of the SF3 gang (is what happens in Elena's ending contingent on her beating ANYBODY, let alone the big boss?), he's as good a pick as any.
P.S.: I was serious about that Poison comment. I'm sick of even hearing about that gender-ambiguous weirdo.
Rid Hershel - You mean like Geese Howard, Iori Yagami, Rugal Bernstein, Vice, Mature, Krizalid, Amakusa, Nakoruru, and Ukyo Tachibana?
How incredibly quickly we forget.
(I'd have added Kim Kaphwan, but only a total dolt actually thinks he got killed in the first place. Really, I think we'd know about that.)
Daala - Not bitter so much as confused (and just for the record, I actually like most of their games despite it all). The thing about most of their big screwups is how easily ALL of them could've been avoided. Thinking of using Rose or Charlie again? Don't kill them. It's that simple. But the story demands it? Well, revise the story so it doesn't require killing off popular characters. Having trouble keeping Sakura's graduation day at bay? Don't, let her graduate and introduce a new high school girl. Maybe even developing Saky into a viable, serious woman fighter, so it's win-win. Leery about using the name Mike Bison? Give the first name only, WHICH YOU ALREADY DID BEFORE, or else change his name and no one else's. No reason you gotta drag two completely unrelated characters into this. Have a nice concept for a companion series and think you could go somewhere with it? Forget the prequel nonsense and simply put it out, as is, in the present day, with no explanations or rationalizations, and let it develop naturally from there. Simple, obvious things they could've done to make their job a whole lot easier, and I'm just baffled that they didn't bother.
I think most players (myself included) are willing to forgive these lapses if the games deliver, and for the most part, they have. Again, as long as they keep it loose, anything is managable. You can't write yourself into a corner if you don't even bother to establish where the corner is.
homepage - http://home.hawaii.rr.com/dkwff
|
| Ultima 285th Post
Copper Customer
| "To DKW..." , posted Fri 27 Sep 07:33
Some things to settle:
> Ultima - Okay, I'll level with you; I don't even understand half of what you're trying to argue (I notice you don't actually disagree with me on a lot of stuff ).
Okay. Here's the SUMMARY PLZ™ version:
Capcom (of Japan) created SF2 with no idea what they were creating. They've since created a number of sequels and prequels and spinoffs, yadda yadda. Capcom has created an underlying story to the SF games that that has been painstakingly compiled by TiamatRoar at http://db.gamefaqs.com/coinop/misc/file/street_fighter_plot.txt (did you even read this, BTW)? The info presented there has been present in Japan for years. It's just that Capcom USA has fucked up the SF translations for years, leading to mass confusion outside of Japan.
Your tirade partly dealt with that, as well as a few other miscellaneous issues (e.g. dead characters returning, when they actually haven't) that I corrected.
> I don't understand why anyone puts so much emphasis on "canon".
I don't know about "emphasis", but the aorementioned FAQ is the first compilation of canon info on the SF storyline on the net, or at least the first one of its size. Prior to this, you would have to wade through tons of sites with bullshit like "Akuma's possessed by a demon", "Eagle works for MI6", or even "Charlie is Blanka" before finding out something that happens to be true, like the info behind Gill and his organization.
> It's plainly obvious to me that Capcom simply does not give a damn.
I'd say you're wrong. They care enough to create the info. They just don't get around to actually putting much of it into their games. It's all fine and dandy if you live in Japan, since the All About books will provide all the info you need. If you're not in Japan/don't read Japanese, it becomes a lot tougher to come across this info. But that doesn't mean that the info doesn't exist.
> Nothing illustrates this better than Charlie,
As I previously stated, Charlie appears in *two* games that are part of the SF storyline - SFA2 and SFA3. No more. SFA1 doesn't exist. His appearance in the 3 Vs. games (XSF, MSF [as Shadow Charlie]), and MvC2) don't count. Canonspike isn't even a Capcom game. It remains to be seen in Capcom Fighting All-Stars counts, but I seriously doubt it. Anything else?
> Now, if you want to make him a regular, recurring character (and again, it's extremely obvious that Capcom desperately wanted to),
> So they gotta twist things around...oh, this game was in the past. And this game. And this game didn't happen in this universe. And this game was just some programmer's hallucination. You see.
You make it sound way more complex that it actually is. It's very simple: A2 and A3 (which take place before SF2) count. The rest don't.
> Now, the easiest solution (other than making their sorta-Guile character someone OTHER than Charlie) would be to "update" Guile's story a little...say, he thought for sure Charlie was dead, but the tough bastard found a way out. Something like that. But apparently the vengeance angle was so critical to Guile, they couldn't do it.
Actually, they could still do that if they so chose. Y'know the rule in comics: If there's no body, the character ain't dead. They could concoct something far-fetched like Shadaloo scientists reconstructed Charlie as Shadow [Charlie] to be their instrument of revenge against Guile (think Unviersal Soldier), but then Shadow broke free of Shadaloo's control and now he's himself again, blah blah blah. As I said, it's their characters, and they're free to retcon their stories as they see fit.
> In short, what we have here is one of the few times Capcom tied their hands with a too-restrictive storyline, and a damn fine SFA character suffered for it. That's why they don't make a habit of it.
Only Chuckles and Bison are confirmed dead, BTW.
> And they could make Ibuki or Twelve the winner of SF3 for all it mattered. I'm willing to accept Alex as the undisputed champ...given how little Gill's defeat means to most of the SF3 gang (is what happens in Elena's ending contingent on her beating ANYBODY, let alone the big boss?), he's as good a pick as any.
Exactly. Capcom probably thought the same thing. SF3 has a back story, but it's so burie you can barely find any hints of it in the game, and most of the characters are barely involved, if they're involved at all. Though it wasn't an entirely random pick, since Capcom did claim that Alex was the main character before the game even came out.
> Thinking of using Rose or Charlie again? Don't kill them. It's that simple.
There's no confirmation that Rose is dead. Charlie's dead, but once again, they can rewrite their character stories as they see fit. It's annoying, but it's their characters. And to date, the only character who has cheated death once is Bison in A3.
> Having trouble keeping Sakura's graduation day at bay? Don't, let her graduate and introduce a new high school girl. Maybe even developing Saky into a viable, serious woman fighter, so it's win-win.
Heh. It'll never happen. Sakura's popularity is based soley on the fact that she's a fighing school girl. Once she loses that fuku, she becomes null and void as a character.
Besides, what's the big deal? She too has only appeared in two games that count: SFA2 and SFA3.
> Leery about using the name Mike Bison? Give the first name only, WHICH YOU ALREADY DID BEFORE, or else change his name and no one else's. No reason you gotta drag two completely unrelated characters into this.
This was Capcom USA's doing. You can't blame Japan for that. CHanging M.Bison's name to Mike probably would have been better choice, but they didn't think about it at the time. Hindsight is 20/20 and all that.
> Have a nice concept for a companion series and think you could go somewhere with it? Forget the prequel nonsense and simply put it out, as is, in the present day, with no explanations or rationalizations, and let it develop naturally from there.
I don't know about you, but I've been hearing about Alpha being a prequel to SF2 since before Alpha 1 came out. If they intended Alpha to be a side-story, they changed their minds very early on, so the whole thing is moot. Alpha series becomes a prequel series to SF2, and SF2's story gets re-written. Sounds simple to me.
--
Ultima - The Right arm of Scrub Voltron
http://uramble.com/index.html - U's Rambling Page
|
| Puar 387th Post
Silver Customer
| "Re(2):Here we go again..." , posted Fri 27 Sep 10:26
quote:
re: Rose
We're still not 100% sure what happened to Rose, so I'll leave that one alone. But it seems that Capcom knew what they were going to do with Rose ahead of time, if that picture of Rose with Bison's cap means anything - it's been around since Alpha 1 I think (it might be from Alpha 2's art, but I can't remember; it doesn't matter, since A2 was released over 2 years before Alpha 3, which is still a long time to foreshadow a character's ultimate fate).
Once upon a long time ago, I had an artwork book that was of SFZ1 stuff. I believe that the artwork in question was in said book because I remember looking at it and going, "Huh? ...Why the hell is she holding that damn hat?"
As for my newfound frenzy in refuting DKW whenever I think he's wrong, I'd do it here, too, but it looks like Ultima has been doing a rather fine ass job of it.
I would like to reiterate a few things though that are being, in my opinion, stupidly questioned.
1) Ryu did win the first SF1, not because he was the person on the 1P side, but because he actually won. I agree with TiamatRoar in that this is one of the spooniest statements ever.
2) Why is it too hard to understand that Charlie, desite multiple appearances in many games, has only appeared in two games that are cannon and take place before his death? Just because he's in a VS game, which, for all intents and purposes, could be called a Dream Match, doesn't mean that he's 'cheating death.' SFZ2 replaces SFZ1 and both SFZ2 and SFZ3 take place before any incarnations of SF2.
3) The Alpha/Zero series has, as far as I known, always been a prequel series, never a side-story. It's how I first found it and have always known it as, just like how Kula has always been a test tube baby. I don't think it's something the creators decided they would do somewhere halfway along the lines...
Now, I'm going to hope that all I posted make sense. I'm numb on novacaine, so I'm not quite fully cognizant. ;D
"You should get to know me better no one's every what they seem..."
|
| TiamatRoar
226th Post
Frequent Customer
| "Re(1):SF3:TS problem" , posted Sat 28 Sep 23:12
quote:
Whose endings are considered canon? Some are obvious but Urien, Gill, and Yun have been messing with my mind for a while.
Capcom hasn't stated which endings are canon at all -_- Well, okay, Alex's and Ken's endings were implied to be canon when Capcom said that Ken and Alex both fought Ryu during the TS period. At any rate, of course, since chronologically (and literally), TS was the last storyline game so far in the SF universe, there isn't exactly anything to gauge with what's canon and what isn't.
My guess is every ending besides Gill's and Urien's are canon. Urien's I'm unsure of either way and Gill's seems too outlandish to be canon. Yun's I don't really see a problem with. Yun (and probably Yang, since he's right there in the ending, too) impresses Gill, Gill hands over control of the twins' village to them after a lecture, then that's about it, as far as I can tell.
|
| Maou
8th Post
New Customer
| "Re(4):Re: What does" , posted Mon 30 Sep 08:35
Actually, "canon" has long been used to refer to the standard accepted works of a particular writer/story/series, etc., "the authentic works of a writer," as Webster's puts it. Since games as a medium with a genuine story are a more recent phenomenon, that term's been used more often than in the days of "beat Donkey Kong, Mario!" The religious connection doesn't have to be assumed; the Latin roots regard to a "rule, model, or standard." And more practically, "arcade story" has twice as many syllables~ ^^
Maou
|
| Gen 748th Post
Red Carpet Regular Member+
| "Re(5):Re: What does" , posted Mon 30 Sep 15:33
quote:
Actually, "canon" has long been used to refer to the standard accepted works of a particular writer/story/series, etc., "the authentic works of a writer," as Webster's puts it. Since games as a medium with a genuine story are a more recent phenomenon, that term's been used more often than in the days of "beat Donkey Kong, Mario!" The religious connection doesn't have to be assumed; the Latin roots regard to a "rule, model, or standard." And more practically, "arcade story" has twice as many syllables~ ^^
Maou
ok. I'll look it up. I was waiting for someone to say that. 
|
|
|
"Re(1):Here we go again..." 
