KylieDog said:
Not really, SF II was just more fun, SF III was less fun, there for it failed to improve the series with the direction it took, which is probably a good part of why it wasn't as big a hit.
I really don't understand this challenge concept, like winning or losing at a game will somehow change the game itself to not suck? How does that work? |
lol...well winning is usually more fun than losing. If someone loses constantly they will surely think a game sucks.
In any case, I can find you countless publications which list street fighter 3 third strike as the best street fighter ever, including screw attack which gives it the best fighting game ever made award.
What street fighter 3 did is called evolving. People who enjoyed SF2 wanted to play something new and exciting...Alpha evolved the series and introduced many things(god bless the custom combo V-ism) but SF3:Third strike took the cake with innovations.
You can still play SF3 like SF2 for a while and it should be as fun as any other SF game...but if you spend a few weeks with it...and learn how to apply the long jump attack, how to parry a fireball here and there, how to tie in Kens jump in 4 hit combo with a super and take off 1/2 of the opponets health, when to use the EX moves, how to properly zone your opponent...it gives your brain something else to think about during the fight. Ad makes it hell of a lot cooler than...jump in, throw, crossover...over and over...
