| Original message ([an error occurred while processing this directive] Views )[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
Replies:
|
| Shin Ramberk
8th Post
 
New Customer
|  "Re(1):Street Fighter anniversery question"
, posted Mon 16 Aug 21:44
quote:
I've been thinking about the 15th anniversery of Street Fighter lately and how...none of it makes sense. SF1 came out in 1987 (16 years ago by 2003, 17 by this year) and SF2 came out in 1991 or so (12 years by 2003, 13 by this year). How exactly is it the 15th anniversery if we already passed up that point 2 years ago, since 2002 would've been the 15th anniversery of the start of the series?
This has also puzzled me. Its driven me nuts actually. The only possible reason I can think of to justify this year as the 15th anniversary is that maybe (AND THE FOLLOWING IS JUST MY SPECULATION), maybe Capcom started development of SF2 in 1989. If that's true, then, SF2 began in '89 but wasn't released until '91 and thus, 2004 is the 15th anniversary of SF2. Still doesn't make a total sense because the franchise clearly started in '87. But whatever, Capcom are our gods and we do whatever they command. blah blah blah.
My theory may hold true still because wasn't Fatal Fury or Art of Fighting released less then a year after SF2. And wasn't that game or games developed by former Capcom employees that worked on SF2. Whatever, my head is spinning and Capcom is just doing what it always does-- act bizarre and arbitrary. Same old story.
|
| KumagaiToshiro
83th Post
Occasional Customer
 
| "Re(2):Street Fighter anniversery question" , posted Mon 16 Aug 22:56
quote:
I've been thinking about the 15th anniversery of Street Fighter lately and how...none of it makes sense. SF1 came out in 1987 (16 years ago by 2003, 17 by this year) and SF2 came out in 1991 or so (12 years by 2003, 13 by this year). How exactly is it the 15th anniversery if we already passed up that point 2 years ago, since 2002 would've been the 15th anniversery of the start of the series?
This has also puzzled me. Its driven me nuts actually. The only possible reason I can think of to justify this year as the 15th anniversary is that maybe (AND THE FOLLOWING IS JUST MY SPECULATION), maybe Capcom started development of SF2 in 1989. If that's true, then, SF2 began in '89 but wasn't released until '91 and thus, 2004 is the 15th anniversary of SF2. Still doesn't make a total sense because the franchise clearly started in '87. But whatever, Capcom are our gods and we do whatever they command. blah blah blah.
My theory may hold true still because wasn't Fatal Fury or Art of Fighting released less then a year after SF2. And wasn't that game or games developed by former Capcom employees that worked on SF2. Whatever, my head is spinning and Capcom is just doing what it always does-- act bizarre and arbitrary. Same old story.
That would kind of make sense if they were counting the starting year of production for SF2. If that's the case, though, they should've just used the release year instead.
"Jill Sandwich!" "Right!"
|
| Baines
0th Post
New Customer
| "Re(2):Street Fighter anniversery question" , posted Tue 17 Aug 00:16
quote:
The only possible reason I can think of to justify this year as the 15th anniversary is that maybe (AND THE FOLLOWING IS JUST MY SPECULATION), maybe Capcom started development of SF2 in 1989. If that's true, then, SF2 began in '89 but wasn't released until '91 and thus, 2004 is the 15th anniversary of SF2. Still doesn't make a total sense because the franchise clearly started in '87.
The franchise started in '87, but the anniversary edition game itself is of the SF2 series specifically. (Did Capcom want to include SF3 originally in the home release? Or was that the same Sony directive that forced SNK to double pack their 2D PS2 releases?)
As for the start of SF2 development, the scans of "Street Fighter II Complete File" that were posted a while back on InsertCredit dates the character concepts to Fall 1988. That was for Street Fighter '89, which was soon replaced with Final Fight. With Final Fight's success, Capcom seriously started on SF2, so you could claim that SF2 really started development in 1989 even though some work started in '88.
Why pick the so-called start of development? This is all speculation on my part, but I believe that Capcom wanted to release an anniversary edition. For that to really mean something, they need a good number, like 5, 10, 15, 20, etc. But 2004 is the 17th anniversary of Street Fighter as a whole, and the 13th anniversary of SF2 specifically, neither of which are "special" numbers. But '89 would be a 15th anniversary, and they could claim that SF2 "started" in 1989, and thus could release a "special" anniversary version in 2004 (as they weren't going to wait until 2006).
Both Megaman 8 and Megaman Anniversary Collection were promoted as anniversary releases, so Capcom sees some value to the label. And I doubt many people actually do the math to see if it really is the 10th or 15th anniversary of a game.
|
| OrochiChris
64th Post
Occasional Customer
| "Re(5):Street Fighter anniversery question" , posted Wed 18 Aug 02:06
quote:
Well, if they don't plan on releasing SF4 until the 20th anniversery, Capcom has 5 years to make something that will completely blow us all away. Otherwise, they'll have quite a few angry fans storming their offices, hungry for blood.
Um, SF3 didn't quite blow anyone away, I think. Given Capcom's track record, *if* they make a new SF-canon game with new sprites (or, Mok-Kos forbid, polygons), it'll only be tangentially related to the previous games. And it WON'T HAVE GEKI.
Cathy: オー！ バイオレンス！アーユー ヒール？
ワッチュアネーム？
Shinobu: な、なんだぁ！？ くっ...でけぇ... 一体何食ってやがんだぁ！？
えぇい！ 日本に来たら、日本語喋れってんだっ！
|
| OrochiChris
66th Post
Occasional Customer
| "Re(9):Street Fighter anniversery question" , posted Wed 18 Aug 03:31
quote:
Well, in this case, I think it's better to stay cautiously pessimistic and say it won't be released EVER.
(Actually, I would rather have an all new cast of characters with just Ryû / Chunli / Alex returning, but if the game gets trashed for not having this and that character in... if they make a good game, I also want it to succeed).
It'll probably take them 2 or 3 tries to properly fine-tune the game... by then, I'm sure a cast of mostly new characters would start to grow on me. I didn't really start liking SF3 too much until 2nd Impact, and that's only because it introduced Hugo. :/ Finally, by 3rd Strike, I started liking the other characters.
Well, except Gouki. If Capcom makes SF4, I hope they don't put him in it at all. Kill him off, or whatever, but I'd rather he didn't show up in SF4's #X revision. ^^;
Cathy: オー！ バイオレンス！アーユー ヒール？
ワッチュアネーム？
Shinobu: な、なんだぁ！？ くっ...でけぇ... 一体何食ってやがんだぁ！？
えぇい！ 日本に来たら、日本語喋れってんだっ！
|
| Iggy 4122th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
     
     
  
| "Re(10):Street Fighter anniversery question" , posted Wed 18 Aug 03:44
quote:
Well, except Gouki. If Capcom makes SF4, I hope they don't put him in it at all. Kill him off, or whatever, but I'd rather he didn't show up in SF4's #X revision. ^^;
The absence of Ken in Jam is a test in my opinion. If no one complain to much about it (he wasn't in MvC1 either), I hope they write him off SF4 if they ever do it. No Ken, no Gôki, plenty of new characters, and Chun/Alex returning.
||
∧||∧
（ / ⌒ヽ But then, they'll never do a SF4 to begin with.
| | |
∪ / ﾉ
| ｜|
∪∪
：
-====-
||
∧／⌒ヽ.
（ / ヽ ﾉ ﾉ ﾉﾉ
| |-〈 〈 〈
∪ ∪∪
-====-
|| , ;''つ'つ
|| .／.／／ ﾉﾉ
∧／ .／
（ / ｒ" up, down, up, down
| |-、 | let's♪diet !
∪ ∪
|
| Sano 1033th Post
Red Carpet Premium Member
| "Re(4):Re(10):Street Fighter anniversery quest" , posted Wed 18 Aug 12:39:
Yes, Ryu beating Ken is from the SF Faq.
No, their friendly might not end, but with Ken having a wife, kid and a student, I just don't see him catching up to Ryu again, especially if Ryu's training with Oro. If SF4 needs another Dragon Punch/Fireball character, they should use Sagat. They probaly won't ever settle the Ryu/Sagat Rivalry since it is an eternal rivalry, (A rivalry that never gets settled. Think Kyo vs. Iori) but they can at least give it some sort of closure like what happened in the Ryu Final Manga. Ryu reopened Sagat's scar, Sagat knocked Ryu down, so it was like a tie.
Though, fan outrage will probably still put Ken in SF4 anyways.
By the way, fan outrage (in Japan anyways) put Ryu, Ken, Gouki and Chun-Li in the SF3 Series. None of them were supposed to be in this Series originally.
[this message was edited by Sano on Wed 18 Aug 13:20] |
| Iron D 2452th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(1):Link to TiamatRoar's SF Plot Guide." , posted Thu 19 Aug 15:32:
quote:
Even if you read it before, it is constantly updated and was updated as recently as 2 Months ago, so please read this.
Link Here
Meh. I'll read it (again) when I'm ready. I read it right around the time it was first created. I also recall Tiamatroar (and there was someone that was translating for him...I forget the name) putting in a fair bit of speculation, like Bison taking over Rose's body and killing Guy, and Zangief being gay.
As for the "killer" hadoken comment, I read it in an Alpha 1 strategy guide done by Versus Books. They may not be Capcom themselves, but a lot of what they said made sense, even by the plot guide's standpoint. They mentioned that the Hadoken was originally a deadly art that was made non-lethal by Gouken.
Edit: After taking a peek at the plot guide, it does indeed say that ALL of Ansatsuken was an art that was originally murderous:
quote:
Satsui no hadou comes out the most in practitioners of the Ansatsuken fighting style, because the root of that fighting style was meant to kill.
Zelkin. Pimped.
[this message was edited by Iron D on Thu 19 Aug 15:51] |
|
|
"Re(4):Street Fighter anniversery question" 
