By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - Street Fighter V Review Thread - MC: 77/ GR: 77.07%

Tagged games:

S.T.A.G.E. on 17 February 2016
Roronaa_chan said:

KI costs way more than 40 and is going to have less content than the finalised SFV. KI is not free, nice try buddy. It was offered on GWG over 2 years after launching as as paid game. Not only that, it launched at a 40 dollar price with way less characters than SFV.

You don't have to hope for anything, Capcom already gave people a content roadmap before the game launched and all the 2015 content is clearly laid out, as are the ways to obtain DLC.

KI with the core characters is $40 (twenty dollars per season). It costs more for the full packages which include the older KI games.



Around the Network
TruckOSaurus on 17 February 2016
Goodnightmoon said:
Roronaa_chan said:

Of course you can't

http://i.imgur.com/IamZoLh.png

And what happens with the 99% of Steam reviews that say "dont buy this game"

http://store.steampowered.com/app/310950/?l=english

Those arent reliable either?

One thing I can tell is that your abilities for compiling stats are not reliable at all. The reviews currently stand at 1,073 negative versus 721 positive that's around 60% not 99%.



Signature goes here!

LudicrousSpeed on 17 February 2016

I am glad I resisted some strong urges I had yesterday to buy this game. Unfinished, rushed out, and free to play coin earning bullsh in a $60 title. Yikes.



Guitarguy on 17 February 2016

Low 80's is disappointing for a mainline Street Fighter title. Will play it this weekend to see if I like it or not.



arcaneguyver on 17 February 2016

LOL at the 5/10 score. "No single player? Well, this is obviously a fun but unimpressive, middle-of-the-road title that nobody will remember in a few months."



Around the Network
Guitarguy on 17 February 2016
CGI-Quality said:
Guitarguy said:
Low 80's is disappointing for a mainline Street Fighter title. Will play it this weekend to see if I like it or not.

Is it? The Dreamcast games were low-mid 80s (and mainline titles) and I always hear how people loved them (as they should, they're fantastic games). I think last gen (and SFIV) have left this false impression of what games scores mean. 

It is in my eyes. Much like Halo 5 getting a Metacritic of 84. Games like the original Halo, Metal Gear Solid, Ocarina of time, Super Mario 64, Goldeneye, Gran Turismo 3, Street Fighter 2 etc were all ground breaking games and still resonate and play well to this day. To see their follow ups get in the low-to-mid 80s is a disappointment especially when such flaws are very evident(Halo 5's extremely short campaign for example). I know it is hard to innovate and make even better sequels to excellent games, but such a drop as we see here is disappointing.. In my opinion. Street Fighter IV may have been an anomaly but at least it was a complete game....



LudicrousSpeed on 17 February 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yAKWAFERrY

Story mode takes 1-2 hours to complete apparently. I may be wrong, but this is like MKX's story mode, yes? Where it is a bunch of cinematics and you play out fights based around the story? That length is pretty crappy. LOL @ the developers gushing about how its free. Well, as bare bones as the release it, I'd hope it would be free.

Can anyone who has played the game go into detail about how different it is than SFIV, gameplay wise? Apparently its way more accessible and casual friendly. Is Zangief still the best character ever?



Guitarguy on 17 February 2016
CGI-Quality said:
Guitarguy said:

It is in my eyes. Much like Halo 5 getting a Metacritic of 84. Games like the original Halo, Metal Gear Solid, Ocarina of time, Super Mario 64, Goldeneye, Gran Turismo 3, Street Fighter 2 etc were all ground breaking games and still resonate and play well to this day. To see their follow ups get in the low-to-mid 80s is a disappointment especially when such flaws are very evident(Halo 5's extremely short campaign for example). I know it is hard to innovate and make even better sequels to excellent games, but such a drop as we see here is disappointing.. In my opinion. Street Fighter IV may have been an anomaly but at least it was a complete game....

Yeah, it was so complete, that it needed several iterations.

To me, people harp too much on scores. This way, the "drop" wouldn't be felt in the same way - if there is one. I've heard nothing but good things about SFV's core gameplay (and found Halo 5 to be better than a lot of the previous games). I paid no attention to the scores and I'm happy I did. Otherwise, I would have avoided what some called a "disappointing game", even if they never played it themselves. Why? Based on a number.

Ahhh but I never said the game itself was disappointing :P I said the score was disappointing. I will give it a go this weekend, I'm sure I will like it.



Signalstar on 17 February 2016

This isn't the score it needs, but the score it deserves right now.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

Guitarguy on 17 February 2016
CGI-Quality said:
Guitarguy said:

Ahhh but I never said the game itself was disappointing :P I said the score was disappointing. I will give it a go this weekend, I'm sure I will like it.

I know what you said and it doesn't change my point. In fact, it helps it: " people harp too much on scores. "


I don't disagree with you but this is a thread solely dedicated to Street Fighter V reviews here... Surely you must have expected people to talk about the scores.