AndrewTS

The rare exception being Contra. Exceptions are rare indeed Indeed. For those unaware, most of the Contra box art in the U.S. kicks the ass of the Japanese versions. The ones that aren't better are at least as good. For example: Contra (NES) vs. Contra (Famicom) Game Boy's Operation C has good box art on both sides, but I like the US one more: American version Japanese version Hard Corps' Japanese box isn't really bad...just... American version Japanese version. In general, the American box art was usually grittier and more action-oriented, and fit the game better, especially with Hard Corps. "For matching service" is part of the title? What's that mean anyway? I've seen it quite a bit on lists when buying imports. What's it all about?

The rare exception being Contra.

OK is a very strong word, i feel Trish is watchable as a wrestler but if she ever went to Japan, the Japanese female wrestlers would run circles around her. You could say that about practically any of the lady wrestlers in WWE. And 95% of the men. Trish was an athletic fitness model, these ones may not be. They may have zero athletic ability. Don't you know, Torrie is one of WWE's most marketable stars (they think)! Just like Bradshaw.

Phalanx on SNES: Old dude with a banjo?! The original Mega Man of course was really bad. Other bad box art. US Toshinden US Astal US Gunstar Heroes US Landstalker US Symphony of the Night (okay, I've seen worse, but leaving off Ayami's awesome artwork is a damn shame) US Street Fighter Alpha Thankfully, the re-released version of the PS game and the Game Boy version has much better official Capcom art. However, the original Saturn and PS artwork.. *shudder* Great box art: Just about any Contra game pre-PS Just about any Castlevania from 16-bit on except for SotN. The Japanese version of the Treasure games SNES SFII Turbo Darkstalkers (PS) Demon's Crest (SNES) ...in fact, most Capcom games, in general. Comix Zone Saturday Night Slam Masters Mega Turrican Super Metroid Killer Instinct and the DKC games

A shitload of people had an NES at the time the SNES was still being released. Unlike a company that sucks like Sega, who drops a system like a hot potato for the new ones, Nintendo kept making games for it. There were quite a few games that came out on SNES, NES, and Game Boy around the same time. A quick scan of the list of NES games also brings up Aladdin, Jungle Book, Lion King, Wario's Woods, a ton of TMNT titles, etc. Development on NES continued until the mid-90s I think, and Nintendo made a newer, smaller NES unit shortly after the SNES began to pick up, too. I never had an NES, so the games I played mostly were good ones, but I played Snake's Revenge--the unofficial Metal Gear game so bad it was struck from canon--and Yo Noid. Both were real stinkers. Street Fighter 2010 looks terrible, but I haven't actually played it first hand. That's a shame. I remember the Genesis game being quite good--you could set traps for the baddies and make weapons by combining different items.

You can kinda tell from the looks of him that he's not a normal human. So, one line in the manual, that doesn't even definitively say. You mean the animated movie where Kazuya was a good guy, and the Devil thing was portrayed more like how Ryu was struggling not to succumb to the Dark Hado in the Alpha movie? No, that's very non-canon.

"Kazuya got his connection to Devil by selling his soul and making a deal for power, not through genetics. He just got the Devil Gene as a result." When was that revealed? Because I had Tekken 2 and never saw anything directly explaining that. But that explanation makes it sound much more like Gouki's situation.

Until Tekken 2, Devil Kazuya had no motivation or powers, and his origin wasn't unveiled until 3. The origins are kinda similar because both Gouki and Kazuya were both normal humans turned into demons--one by unlocking the Shun Goku Satsu, the other by genetic tinkering (which is even more far-fetched, actually).

Stolen from Gamespot: My guess is that Anchor is not going to be making the next X-Box game. Despite GC's WMXIX having the WORST STORY MODE EVER in a wrestling game (seriously, WWE storylines make more sense than the nearly-unplayable Revenge mode), the game was still better than Raw 1 or 2, and SD's selling very well. It can't get any worse than Raw 1, can it? Although, what's wrong with AKI? And the makers of Tao Feng working on this = not too promising.

Blizzard = Sub-Zero in a gorilla costume.

I haven't played much on NES, but what I liked the most was Super Mario Brothers. I liked Super Punch Out, though, but haven't played the first game. Where's the sequel already?!

And being incredibly deep doesn't make a game good or fun, necessarily. Aside from the gameplay preferences, another thing I hate about 3D fighters is that nobody but Namco has any decent character designs. VF: Lame, generic. DoA? Lame, generic, or just plain ripped off (Hogan, Mai, one guy looks exactly like the old dude in Tobal). The original characters in Capcom's own 3D fighters suck for the most part. The characters I've seen in the new MK games from about MK3 on (I haven't played it or seen them all, though) are the same deal. "Frost"--hot damn, there's an original character. Bo Rai Cho seems decent enough, but we've had drunken-style characters in plenty of other fighters first. Kazuya just has to be a tongue-in-cheek tribute to Street Fighter. Otherwise it would be too blatant. The scar, several of his moves, the Devil thing, his relationship to his pops is kinda like Gouki/Sheng turned on its head, and in Tekken 4 he's missing an eye. In Tekken 5 is he going to be bald, 7 feet tall, and use a version of the Raging Demon super? SNK has kinda fallen into the same trap these days, unfortunately. See: Kula Ayanami, TETSUUUUUO!!

That's a shame, because DoA and SvC suck. What's "ST?"

Me neither, but I couldn't tell the difference between "new Coke" and Coke Classic.

40 minute bad CG movie plays, a cyborg chick is sexually molested then sings some really bad pop song.

I like Angle, but yeah--he's tremendously overrated. He's not as bad as Edge or RVD as far as selling, problems with offense, etc--but he can't touch Eddy and Benoit. As far as using psychology/selling--there are plenty of "average" guys on the roster that completely smoke him in that aspect, like Storm.

Compared to most fighters out today, it is shallow. That was my entire point.

"People's perception of Tekken (based a lot on uneducated magazine bullshit, so we're united on our dislike for bad reviews) is ten-strings, multi-throws, deathfists and Eddy mashing. In reality, Tekken is based on constant, complex movement (steps, backdashes, wavedashes and all sorts of complex character specific stuff), baiting out a whiff, punishing, that kind of stuff. It's a totally different game, not even similar." So we come right back around to "game magazines today suck." "No, trust me, SC2 is more of a 50/50 game than almost anything else out there. Hard to see mid/throw or mid/low mixups are a huge part of most people's game, and the post-GI game is 50/50 also, between moves that force a re-GI and moves that punish a whiffed re-GI (technically that's not true anymore with 2G, but that's going into too much detail)." By the same token, I could make the Marvel vs. games sound waaay more strategic than they are by their very nature. Nope. I knew what you were talking about with SC2 (G.I. = guard impact), and saw what you were talking about. You're pretending as if SC is the only game with anything like GIs, and that's not true. It's also not a new technique in fighting games in general. Guard Reversals have been around at least since the VF days, but moves more like the guard impact (which aren't a counter by themselves, but stun for a counter of your choice) have been in 2D fighters (SF3), other 3D fighters, and even in freakin' WWF No Mercy (not uncommon to get in a punch reversal, punch-reversal, etc sequence). It expounds on it more than a lot of the other ones that have used it, but you're greatly exaggerating its importance. However, I completely forgot about that aspect of the game, so it isn't my "lack of knowledge." It's my lack of caring about it, because I was thinking more of Soul Edge.

Looks like a crap show except for the main event--in other words, just like every Smackdown for the past couple of months.

...and yadda yadda. I was talking about the fact that those are even in the game. Are they in the game? Yes, they are. In virtually every 3D fighter, combos are generally in the tap-tap variety, aside from the grapple combos and juggles. Not necessarily the ten-strings, but plenty in the 3-5 hit area. If you don't want to learn the counter for every specific part of a multi-part grapple combo, you're stuck in an inescapable combo, unless you mash and get lucky. I guess "memorizing button combos to escape multi-part throws" = play depth. Thrilling. Vagueness, thy name is Jer. It's quick, flashy, and brutal. And "50/50" mindgames describes pretty much any fighting game, but less in the case of SC. X Against a skilled player, no, but when that's all that plays them, yes. The way nearly every button combination produces something, usually there are rewards for mashathons. Good for Namco, but I still see them in plenty of other 3D fighters still coming out. However, in the Namco ones currently, you can't just jump, you have to do a jumping special move. You can't just jump to get around or psyche-out, you have to commit yourself to an attack. Except for the older games and plenty of non-Namco games. Also--sidestep, throw = 40% damage? That's not overpowered? I said "I hate 3D fighters and prefer they'd stay in the arcades where they belong? They have no depth?" No, I said there are things about them I don't like. I have a ton of 3D fighters. They sit on the shelf unplayed, because I do not care for them very much.

There's always a chance. *you admit I was right, but don't really. It deserved to be banned, but not for the "controversy." I've seen more violent b-movies (which is what it was) with a PG-13 rating. Ratchet & Clank 2 is really good, but Jak II? I played the same damn game in the last edition, minus the transformation gimmick. Where's the innovation? It isn't much better than the last game, so sorry--unacceptable. You named two games, one of which has been up there with VJ for Game of the Year or at least Action/Plat honors. That doesn't justify your argument. It would be at the "bad" part of the continuum, so it wouldn't qualify, now would it? Great way to completely ignore the point made, as usual. I'm sure those Madden freaks will love Final Fantasy VII-2. Agreed. Although only the Saturn attempted to compete directly, and prices, development woes, and bad 3D did it in. Nobody is going to buy the Bluetooth Tapwave Whatthefuckever. However, there are two main marketing strategies that Sony is going to have to go with: carve out a niche of their own with the PSP or swipe a sizable portion of Nintendo's market share. I don't see a niche that the PSP could really fill, except for 20-something gamers who can afford the PSP, probably like Square, and have plenty of disposable income to blow on another portable. However, for wider success the price of it will have to be competitive with the GBA, or else there is no point to getting a system that is way more expensive than the GBA, and is moderately more powerful. And frankly, 3-D is not a good fit for a portable system. However, they have not released a portable that is an N64-caliber bomb...yet. The D.S. we're not sure about exactly. What? Actually, the SNES had a bunch of great games released near the end of its run, including stuff by Rare when people actually cared about their games. DKC was a major blow to consoles like the 3DO, Jag, and 32X, which were already on shaky foundations to begin with. In the mid-90s, the SNES was pulling far ahead in games and picked up plenty of new customers...then they pissed it away waiting to release the N64. The PSX didn't come out and wipe the floor with them, it just gobbled up the market share that Nintendo handed them on a silver plate while they promised a wonder system that would smoke them all, but instead delivered the N64. Yes, I'm sure companies will stop making games for the system with the huge installed user base and exclusively make games for the unproven portable. By "better deal" what are you referring to? The days of companies being licensed exclusively to one system are long gone. It's not sensible to make games for one unproven system when there's one out that is proven and will provide the best opportunity. Could you be any more of a Sony fanboy? You are denying the fundamental differences between the console and handheld markets. Sony and the PS1 were all about the 3D. Sega tried to compete with them on that and they failed. The N64 was just kinda hanging around getting third-rate PS1 castoffs. This is a different story. Sony needs a diverse software line, and that will be just to get themselves a foothold. The X-Box right now is a distant third in consoles, and that's with Microsoft's backing and losing money on every console. The next X-Box will sell better, but when the competition is strong (unlike it was when Sony came into the market), it is going to be hard to jump in and start taking over the market. Sony will be in the same position in the handheld market: the GBA has a huge installed user base, and a backward compatible system that gives it a game library that is hard to match. X-Box's strategy has been to try to out-Sony Sony: make your system do a bunch of other things besides play games, line up a good group of developers to make games, and put together a flexible online plan. Yet they aren't making much headway. Granted, MS was severely handicapped by the Japanese xenophobia (the DC had been outselling X-Boxes after it was officially "dead" for quite a while), something that Sony won't face. However, the PSP is going to have to deliver something that makes people want to switch. It's not going to be able to compete via games for quite a while, the price point is questionable, and they have no experience in handhelds, which is quite a different market from consoles. I don't see how they're going to waltz in and crush Nintendo like you think, and for some bizaare reason hope, they will.

Bushido Blade--PS1.

Why does Raw have to be live anymore? Why the hell do commercial breaks have to take place DURING MATCHES?

Thanks, Flik. I got back another reply, so I sent another one back. First his, then my reply: There you have it; GI hates 2D fighters. However, I wanted to clear up some misconceptions about them, and I hope it gets across. Just because 2D fighting characters only have "special moves" in the single digits most of the time, they have almost as many true attacks as a 3D fighting game character, plus there's still a wealth of gameplay depth--some of which is rarely or never found in 3D games.

Okay, which good games have they made lately? .... ....? Thought so. I find that a silly basis, kinda like how Treasure fanboys always bring up a ten-year-old game to justify how great and innovative their titles are.