Good point. I guess you kinda "level up" while playing because your offline rank just gets higher, you can't lose ranks, but that's it. KI has unlocks tied to leveling up, iirc, and it's a good idea.
I think it's time to shed the idea that Street Fighter V is a bad game.
- Thread starter Dartastic
- Start date
Good point. I guess you kinda "level up" while playing because your offline rank just gets higher, you can't lose ranks, but that's it. KI has unlocks tied to leveling up, iirc, and it's a good idea.
IronLich
Member
IMO SFV has a much MUCH greater stigma, because while I don't think it's a bad game. I do think that it's an expensive game, and the in-game fight money is SO meager that unless you play this one game nonstop, you're not making nearly enough to afford essential elements such as characters. Heck, you're lucky if you leave the latest content update with just a costume before your actual wallet gets opened.
I really don't like this piecemeal trend in fighting games, and Street Fighter V is the worst offender. Quite frankly, I just wish they would put out a Super version so that I can just have all the stages/costumes/characters without having to pay for it one by one, but according to Capcom, that's not the future of fighting game content distribution.
I really don't like this piecemeal trend in fighting games, and Street Fighter V is the worst offender. Quite frankly, I just wish they would put out a Super version so that I can just have all the stages/costumes/characters without having to pay for it one by one, but according to Capcom, that's not the future of fighting game content distribution.
I've seen it over and over with no problem, but for some reason, this last one gave me that uncanny valley feeling today.
EDIT: Why did I quote it? I just had to see it again. It's creeping me out.
Yeah. That way even if you lose, you don't feel it was a waste.
SeeNoWeevil
Member
While I do somewhat agree, there are many aspects of it I really dislike. But when you've been around for a quite a few releases and every single time without fail it's the same story; this game sucks, the previous one was so much better (a game also hated on severely at release). It gets REAL old. It's just a given at this point. Everyone hates the current Street Fighter. When the next Street Fighter comes out, people will hate that and SFV will be held in high regard. You see a similar thing with Souls games to some extent.
I think I've learnt to accept though that fighting games now are made on shoestring budgets and their production values/content reflects that.
It never was a bad game , just an unfinished one and we've had baby steps made every couple months to add content. It's not always the right kind of content but it's something at least.
Despite all the other arguably better fighters out I still find myself playing SFV more then all of them so it's gotta be doing something right.
Despite all the other arguably better fighters out I still find myself playing SFV more then all of them so it's gotta be doing something right.
The discussion over this game has become borderline evangelical. You've got people who dislike the game preaching about how shitty the game is to those that like it, and those that like it preaching to those that don't how great it is and how the detractor is wrong/a noob.
As someone else earlier said, stop seeking validation for the game and play what you enjoy. You're not going to convert anyone who doesn't like the game to your convent just because you give them a laundry list of positives.
Personal opinion: I've played the game a lot since beta stages, don't think it's an inherently "bad" game but it's better watched by top players at tournaments than it is to play it yourself. Netcode is quite terrible for a 2017 release and there are some quirks to the mechanics of the game that I don't find enjoyable, toppled with poor communication with the userbase and questionable decisions from Capcom. I'm down to try it again though if anyone is interested in playing lol.
As someone else earlier said, stop seeking validation for the game and play what you enjoy. You're not going to convert anyone who doesn't like the game to your convent just because you give them a laundry list of positives.
Personal opinion: I've played the game a lot since beta stages, don't think it's an inherently "bad" game but it's better watched by top players at tournaments than it is to play it yourself. Netcode is quite terrible for a 2017 release and there are some quirks to the mechanics of the game that I don't find enjoyable, toppled with poor communication with the userbase and questionable decisions from Capcom. I'm down to try it again though if anyone is interested in playing lol.
JohnSpartanLee
Member
I think that looks fine.I've seen it over and over with no problem, but for some reason, this last one gave me that uncanny valley feeling today.
EDIT: Why did I quote it? I just had to see it again. It's creeping me out.
This one is creeping me out:
Kill it with fire.
entremet
Member
I disagree. SFIV series was rather popular and reinvigorated the scene.
sixteen-bit
Member
the hate is overrated. i dont like it nearly as much as sfiv but its still an excellent fighting game that should not be bashed as much as it is.
Complete disagree with people saying the core gameplay is fine, it is the main issue. If you look at characters returning from SFIV, every single one of them has less interesting tools than the previous game. Some, like Juri, have been totally ruined. Most characters have stubby T-Rex normals, there are no good defensive options (so oki is boring), there is only one character who can zone (Guile).
Why would I play SFV instead of games like GG Xrd, Tekken 7, Killer Instinct, Kof XIV, BB:CF? Every hour I spend in Xrd's training mode rewards me with new combos I can pull off, new set ups and new knowledge about what I should be doing in the multitude of different situations I find myself in, SFV has none of that. When USFIV was around it was worth watching tournaments week in week out because the top players always had new tech which would blow your mind or execute combos that you wouldn't be able to pull off (even in training mode) in a million years, SFV has none of that.
SFV remains one of my biggest disappointments in gaming ever. What is even more disappointing is that the community is being let down by a company who seem more interested in selling bikini DLC costumes than they do in addressing people's problems. I'd be willing to cut Capcom some slack if I thought they gave a damn about delivering a good product.
Why would I play SFV instead of games like GG Xrd, Tekken 7, Killer Instinct, Kof XIV, BB:CF? Every hour I spend in Xrd's training mode rewards me with new combos I can pull off, new set ups and new knowledge about what I should be doing in the multitude of different situations I find myself in, SFV has none of that. When USFIV was around it was worth watching tournaments week in week out because the top players always had new tech which would blow your mind or execute combos that you wouldn't be able to pull off (even in training mode) in a million years, SFV has none of that.
SFV remains one of my biggest disappointments in gaming ever. What is even more disappointing is that the community is being let down by a company who seem more interested in selling bikini DLC costumes than they do in addressing people's problems. I'd be willing to cut Capcom some slack if I thought they gave a damn about delivering a good product.
Jawmuncher
Member
I'd argue the negativity this time around was pretty large when you look at the sales data. Game constantly failed to meet expectations by a large margin. So while said negativity online is shit posting. A large audience definitely voted with their wallet for SFV.
Tekken 7 def had way more time to bake. Capcom keeps rushing games out. I fear for MvC: Infinite as a result.
Max Knight
Member
I think Street Fighter V is a good game; I always have.
That said, while it has been vastly improved since launch, it still could be a lot better.
I think the game's input lag is too high, but I suspect that is by design, so I've given up the ghost on that one.
The main thing that I think still could be improved is online functionality. It still takes quite a while to find matches, and even 4-5 bar matches are pretty laggy sometimes.I have pretty fast broadband, and I don't have issues like this with other games. KI in particular blows SFV out of the water in this department.
I agree with the OP that the hate is overblown. SFV is a good game. Not a perfect game, or even a great game, but it's good.
That said, while it has been vastly improved since launch, it still could be a lot better.
I think the game's input lag is too high, but I suspect that is by design, so I've given up the ghost on that one.
The main thing that I think still could be improved is online functionality. It still takes quite a while to find matches, and even 4-5 bar matches are pretty laggy sometimes.I have pretty fast broadband, and I don't have issues like this with other games. KI in particular blows SFV out of the water in this department.
I agree with the OP that the hate is overblown. SFV is a good game. Not a perfect game, or even a great game, but it's good.
Their idea of "Arcade" mode is actually more insulting than nothing however.
T5 was a more robust and rewarding arcade mode than whatever the fuck we got in T7. Treasure battle is just a better version of survival.
Son of a Witch
Member
Nah, it was and still is a bad game. Bad art direction, boring gameplay (both to play and to watch), uninspired characters, very scarce features...
I wasn't a big fan of it, but SF4 released with nothing to compare it against and it still was a better game. SF5 has released in a time where things like Xrd exist, so it pales in comparison.
The only thing it has going on for it is the name. Had it been a new IP, it would have already been forgotten.
On the flipside, there's a real chance for DBFZ or a new IP of taking the FG crown, which is good. Maybe a Capcom fueled by better competition will finally do something right.
I wasn't a big fan of it, but SF4 released with nothing to compare it against and it still was a better game. SF5 has released in a time where things like Xrd exist, so it pales in comparison.
The only thing it has going on for it is the name. Had it been a new IP, it would have already been forgotten.
On the flipside, there's a real chance for DBFZ or a new IP of taking the FG crown, which is good. Maybe a Capcom fueled by better competition will finally do something right.
BudokaiMR2
Member
As other shave said, it might not be a bad game but it is absolutely divisive.
A lot of people try to draw some parallel with SFIV and some of the hate if got but even then, the detractors mostly focused on the graphics and art style, not the gameplay. I was not a fan of the bulky aesthetic and was honestly disappointed that SFV continued in that direction, even if it did refine it and looks much more consistent to me.
However, even when I was complaining about the art style I complimented the game for how well it transitioned the SF 2D sprite gameplay into the 2.5D engine.
Personally, I said I would buy the game as soon as Ibuki was added to the roster, but I hated her default costume and did not like the changes to her fighting style once she was revealed. I was already not feeling the streamlined design which had turned most everyone into rush down characters so that was the last draw for me.
It's perfectly fine to still enjoy the game, but I feel like both sides at this point would be better off admitting the game is divisive and moving on. Lol
A lot of people try to draw some parallel with SFIV and some of the hate if got but even then, the detractors mostly focused on the graphics and art style, not the gameplay. I was not a fan of the bulky aesthetic and was honestly disappointed that SFV continued in that direction, even if it did refine it and looks much more consistent to me.
However, even when I was complaining about the art style I complimented the game for how well it transitioned the SF 2D sprite gameplay into the 2.5D engine.
Personally, I said I would buy the game as soon as Ibuki was added to the roster, but I hated her default costume and did not like the changes to her fighting style once she was revealed. I was already not feeling the streamlined design which had turned most everyone into rush down characters so that was the last draw for me.
It's perfectly fine to still enjoy the game, but I feel like both sides at this point would be better off admitting the game is divisive and moving on. Lol
Chingachgook
Banned
SeeNoWeevil
Member
SFIV was considered dirt when it first released even though you're right, it was popular and did reinvigorate the scene.
Biggest issue this game has is Chun Li's face in her winpose:
This has bothered me since day 1. Ibuki's winpose is also heinous:
Punished_Snake
Member
I was going to make a similar thread and talk about the game. Even if some pro players dislike it, there are many pro players that love the game and tokido loves it and stated that he liked it more than SF4:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMqJbBdfLrk
Gamerbee said that you can't win in SFV without playing a top tier character, but after his statement, Bonchan won two or three premiere events with Nash (considered to be a weak character) in season 2.
Fchamp said the game is random, so how he made top 8 in Evo with Dhalsim? pure luck or skill and knowledge?
Top players are consistent in SFV, punk didn't lose a single match in Evo until grand finals. That really shows that SFV isn't a random game.
Yes Barlog and Ibuki are cheap and they are going to be nerfed and Ryu need the buff, but the game is pretty good.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMqJbBdfLrk
Gamerbee said that you can't win in SFV without playing a top tier character, but after his statement, Bonchan won two or three premiere events with Nash (considered to be a weak character) in season 2.
Fchamp said the game is random, so how he made top 8 in Evo with Dhalsim? pure luck or skill and knowledge?
Top players are consistent in SFV, punk didn't lose a single match in Evo until grand finals. That really shows that SFV isn't a random game.
Yes Barlog and Ibuki are cheap and they are going to be nerfed and Ryu need the buff, but the game is pretty good.
Punished_Snake
Member
According to https://twitter.com/noodalls SFV input lag is 88.2 ms which is 5.3 frames, it has improved a lot since launch.
Part of it is how bare bones it seems compared to its contemporaries. Guilty gear, tekken, and mortal kombat all have new versions with way more content and polish, while it feels like capcom cares more about adding dlc costumes to SFV than actually improving it.
On the subject of the lower execution requirement, for me the biggest loss is the lack of creativity in combos now. There's a lot less of a personal touch in how each player of a character plays them.
On the subject of the lower execution requirement, for me the biggest loss is the lack of creativity in combos now. There's a lot less of a personal touch in how each player of a character plays them.
Zombegoast
Member
The core mechanic in SFV works on paper but yes it's unbalanced. Top consist of characters( And Dhalsim) with corner pressure, throw loops and jab AA. Just because the game is entertaining to watch doesn't excuse it's flaws, Alpha 3 is broken and yet it's a fun game to play and watch.
SFV's only current failing is a lack of a properly structured arcade mode, that's it.
The negativity surrounding is truly hyperbolic and toxic. I didn't buy Tekken 7, but I was surprised to hear how it too has meager single-player content, that online was completely broken on PS4 for weeks after launch and that it has horrific loading times. Where was the widespread outrage there? People constantly shitting on SFV and Capcom has reached a point where it's just laughable and impossible to take seriously most of the time. Yes, the launch was a shitshow, but improvements have been made since.
The negativity surrounding is truly hyperbolic and toxic. I didn't buy Tekken 7, but I was surprised to hear how it too has meager single-player content, that online was completely broken on PS4 for weeks after launch and that it has horrific loading times. Where was the widespread outrage there? People constantly shitting on SFV and Capcom has reached a point where it's just laughable and impossible to take seriously most of the time. Yes, the launch was a shitshow, but improvements have been made since.
Punished_Snake
Member
I bought Akuma, Urien, Ed and many stages with fight money. SSFV will help a lot, but I like that I can buy new characters and new stages with fight money.
Every Friday Capcom release new challenges to do which will grant you at least 6.5K fight money. New trials were released with the latest patch (gives fight money), every mode in the game gives you fight money. Leveling a character will give you fight money.
But every game has flaws?
Saying the game is unbalanced is bollocks. Low two for a lot of tier lists is Nash and Chun. Nash won two Majors and had a 9th place, while Chun was Top8. No Balrog, Laura or Ibuki in Top8. So basically tiers are so close that player skill and momentum is what dictates the outcome of the matches.
SFV has some problems, but balance is not one of them. Could it be even more balanced? Sure, but balance in this game is a positive.
JohnSpartanLee
Member
Yes! Terrible! And Chun + Ibuki are the only characters that I'd want to play from the current roster (looking forward to Sagat and hoping for Fei Long to be added).This has bothered me since day 1. Ibuki's winpose is also heinous:
LordKasual
Banned
Why on earth do people like talking about Cammy's outfit so much
Punished_Snake
Member
Unbalanced yet eight different characters in top 8 Evo 2017.
I wish more people would recognize that SFV is a deeply flawed game with a lot of design issues that are really apparent and pretty broken, but there is something in what's left of the Street Fighter formula to be compelling to some people.
3S is the same way. That game is next level ass cheeks. Broken characters with hilarious match ups, some of the most broken OS shenanigans in the history of fighting games, and tons of rounds that come down to ToD combos or unblock loops. That game was considered clown shoes status for years because it was honestly not a very well made fighting game on a lot of levels. It only still has respect because the Japanese tournament and exhibition formats highlighted the couple of compelling aspects of the game like the unique neutral. That alone is strong enough to create a niche of people that love it.
The general consensus is that SFV doesn't have something buried in it that is on that level of compelling, but there's something in there that people want to play. Tbh a large majority of the hate is due to the fact a lot of people can see those moments but are frustrated that the rest of the game outside of them is super janky and messed up.
3S is the same way. That game is next level ass cheeks. Broken characters with hilarious match ups, some of the most broken OS shenanigans in the history of fighting games, and tons of rounds that come down to ToD combos or unblock loops. That game was considered clown shoes status for years because it was honestly not a very well made fighting game on a lot of levels. It only still has respect because the Japanese tournament and exhibition formats highlighted the couple of compelling aspects of the game like the unique neutral. That alone is strong enough to create a niche of people that love it.
The general consensus is that SFV doesn't have something buried in it that is on that level of compelling, but there's something in there that people want to play. Tbh a large majority of the hate is due to the fact a lot of people can see those moments but are frustrated that the rest of the game outside of them is super janky and messed up.
atomic moth
Member
A lot of people who played fighting games for a while before SF4 initially hated it, some never liked it. Which was the point of the poster you quoted.
IMO, SF4 is a boring and ugly game.
Chingachgook
Banned
Saying Tekken 7 is the best the series has ever been is not 100% subjective. Maybe 40-60% subjective. Lol. Because it has a VERY positive reception from critics and players. The hardware and graphics are at it best currently, a solid launch, and lastly the engine has not changed significantly, just engine-refinement. So yes somethings are subjective, but there are also objective data points to look at too.
It makes sense to us that see a few things: 1) we are not happy with Capcom character modeling in MvC:I, this modeling might be perfect but it's weird enough to have those feeling of uh no not this again 2) People disappointment of some SF4 characters not making it back in, this reinforces that, personally I'm all for new characters. But I do see how some people get riled up about it, it's not like it makes zero sense. Balancing new characters and old ones is a tricky part for any Fighting Game Company... And deserves it's own thread on how to do it.
But I just wanted to address that is makes some sense to some people.
why should we see it as an "excellent fighting game", when it's missing some of the most basic aspects of the street fighter series, that SFIV made sure to bright back?
where is the fireball game? In SFIV, fireballs at medium range (where you could anti air on reaction) and short range (as a poke) were a very significant part of the neutral game. Aside from guile, fireballs are almost non existant in SFV.
anti airs have also been a mess. Instead of having to use the intended move for anti aring (medium/heavy normal, or a shoryuken, with it's corresponding motion), people could use anti air jabs. Then they nerfed shoryukens, and as a result they weren't good for anti airing anymore. They fixed shoryukens, but anti air jabs are not really gone yet.
And much more than others have already gone over in the other thread we had some days ago (so there's no point in me going over everything myself).
Just look at ryu.
In SFIV, ryu could play at high level with a combination of mid/close range fireballs + shoryuken anti airs + poking with great mid range normals + reaction whiff punishing with sweep/crouching medium kick. In SFV, there's game mechanics/design decisions in place, to get in the way of each of those things.
Punished_Snake
Member
I disagree, graphics looks great and many stages looks beautiful. New comers such as Rashid, Laura and Nicalli are very popular characters in the game. The V system isn't the most innovative system ever in fighting games, but it's very interesting and fun. I hope in SSFV they add one more V trigger for each character, but it would be hard to balance the game I think.
we even had 9 different characters in the Top8
And yet, it still got shat on and lots of people proclaimed that SF3 was the better game and that IV sucked. I agree that there is a "Street Fighter Cycle" and that people will say SF6 sucks and wish it were more like SFV when it comes out, too.
This isn't really true. Play the brain dead easy single player stuff and play 5 minutes a week for 5000+ FM and you can afford every character, especially as each character gets you more FM. SFV is expensive because the premium, can't-earn-for-free costumes are $4. Plus, the game is always super cheap so you can get it + S1 + S2 for $40 on sale all the time so that's a lot of content and easy FM potential right there.
I would never recommend Survival mode as a substitute for anything aside a cure for insomnia. I think SFV would be a better game if that mode was removed entirely.
I do agree with your overall sentiment. There's a pervasive negativity that surrounds SFV that doesn't accurately reflect the game. I mentioned in the OT I was expecting Evo to be pretty boring because I internalized the narrative that SFV was boring to watch and was surprised at how exciting it turned out. I also expected a ton of Laura, Rogs, and Uriens because the narrative is SFV is unbalanced and they're the top tier but none of them made it into the Top 8 which featured 9 different characters across 8 players.
The issue is people believe SFV deserves the negativity because of the terrible launch. If one thinks that a game always deserves shit, regardless of its current state, because the launch was poor then that's that. Capcom can't go back in time to fix their mistake so the impression is set.
I don't believe it's fair but it is what it is. I think it negatively impacts the game because it's treated as if it's the same game that it was last year so there isn't incentive to improve. It has the negative impact of confusing potential buyers who read outdated info or outright lies that people will spout because shitting on SFV is the safest stance one can take. Pro SFV players shit on SFV on commentary for SFV. At this point justifying one's speech as "people deserve to know so Capcom will do better" is bullshit because if they're moving in the right direction the criticism should start to yield.
Honestly, SFV being terrible is more of a meme than anything. I don't think there's a lot of truth in it and if there is, so many other current fighting games are worse in many of the same ways. Unfortunately, SF is popular enough that people have an opinion on its failings. The only game I see starting to get a lot of the same criticism is Tekken 7 which is one of the few popular fighting games out there. SFV might have terrible netcode compared to IJ2 or KI but it obliterated games like KOF or Xrd. But you won't see people raking those games over the coals because most people don't play them and they'd probably sell just as many copies if they had no online play whatsoever.
Punished_Snake
Member
Third Strike wasn't focused on fire ball game. Third strike is more offensive than SF4. Sf4 is like SF2.
SFV doesn't have many shotos, in fact, it has the least amount of shotos so far in a SF game.
And I don't agree that fire ball game doesn't exist, it depends on the match up.
People still hated it. Specifically, the tournament players hated the game, judged it as dumbed down for casuals, threatened to go back to an older game, and kept playing it anyway. This is a cycle as old as Capcom fighting games.
The big difference between SF4 and SFV is SF4 had casual sales and SFV didn't. Competitively, SFV's scene is just as healthy or healthier than SF4's.
Punished_Snake
Member
Yeah, hating SFV is a pastime for people. If everything was completely fair and other games were judged as harshly as SFV, nearly every fighting game but NRS games would be flogged.
Snacks the sober sea lion
Member
Almost every time I watch the game, I see something that just seems off. Movement looks jerky, bad netcode, top players jumping in situations that would be incredibly unsafe in Street Fighter IV, anti-air jabs, using the same normals 3 times in a row without moving, fishing for frame traps and then converting those hits into 50% damage combos instead of the usual poking and then confirming. Nothing convinces me to take time away from Guilty Gear.