Are this 2 game really comparable.

Then I'm just going to claim powerstone is the winner and walk away.

Knowledge of the system is paramount, but if there is a deeper system then there is more to know thusly creating a larger gap. That is why your statement  "The gap between great and good players will be roughly the same in both games." isn't really correct. Or on a technicality is correct. The gap may be the same, but the amount of knowledge, investment of time, and skill to create that gap will be drastically different.

I didn't care for SF IV at first, but it's grown on me. A lot. I love it.

I'm not sure which I like more, but I think that Street Fighter IV is fundamentally the better game. It's the deepest, most balanced fighter I've ever played.

Brawl is extremely deep. What makes the game such a masterpiece is its ability to be sneakily accessible to anyone. Yet those who want a fuller experience will find it. Every move has a counter every counter has a counter. It is a fast paced chess match.

To be completely honest, the last time I can honestly say I LOVED street fighter series was during the SNES era. I played SF3 or third strike or whatever on the DC and while I liked the game and enjoyed it alot, I felt the game got much more complex. Now it seems what I see as "complex" you see as "deep" and that can lead to a whole other debate.

Based on your placement of them in comparison to mine I'm assuming you're calling Tekken the more deep of the two?

I don't know personally because I'm a Virtua Fighter guy for life. Everything else 3D is merely playing catch up and always has been since the first VF created the genre.

The problem with saying "Fun" is the determiner of quality is that everyone is going to have fun doing something else. For some mastering a complex game and using that mastery to dominate is what makes a fighting game fun. To them a deeper game is superior. But to somebody else, funny noises and a good soundtrack makes a better game. But with such a broad determination of quality there can't actually be a determination of quality, making the entire question moot.

Better game/fighter= Street Fighter 4

More fun= Brawl

If you want to claim Powerstone as the winner, you will ned to create a topic in which it is one of the games being discussed. This is not that topic.

Depth is not quality, but the argument can also be made that a knowledge of Brawl is just as hard to come by as one of Street Fighter, because thee are many more elements to it than the traditional ighter: each stage and its unique traits (layout, sometimes physics, interactive features), items and item physics and usage, priority of certain special moves over others, the way gravity affects each character differently, the inherently different scoring strategies for Stock matches versus Timed matches...

Even if you want to make the argument that depth is equivalent to quality, the answer to that question is not clear-cut, and the many, many, many different ways in which Brawl can be played only compounds that.

Street Fighter 4 is better in my opinion. I Have Both games. The Fighting system in Street Fighter 4 has more depth than Super Smash Brawl.

Virtua Fighter is a mountain which I find too intimidating to climb.

Yes, I tend to find Tekken "deep" whereas Dead or Alive is "intuitive".