Avatar

Can Street Fighter IV really be that good?

Written by Aaron Mitchell | Thursday, 19 February 2009 10:00

I’ve made my feelings on Fighting Games abundantly clear in a feature article (my first in fact) for That Aussie Game Site. I think they’re decidingly lacking in any sort of innovation and have evolved little in over a decade of pretty consistent popularity.

In keeping with my theory of unimaginative developers Street Fighter IV is actually a step back for the series, its a 2D brawler with 3D graphics that features a few new characters on top of the original Super Street Fighter 2 cast. Other than a few new features such as built up mega attack bar and block breaking attacks, the game is very similar to its original early nineties predecessor Street Fighter II.

But if you take a look at Metacritic, its like the reviewers had their balls in a fish wire noose with a Capcom exec at the other end gently yanking it if the review veered into negative territory. Read them here.

They are insanely gushing over a game that actually celebrates doing nothing new and still prices itself as a full new game. Reviews drip with quotes that talk about the ‘purity of the fighting experience’ and ‘delivering a tried and true formula’ or the old ‘classic gameplay’ chestnut. Translation: Don’t expect anything other than arcade, time trial and versus. Thats it.

Well I’m getting it tomorrow for an over night rental with some mates so I can judge for myself. To me the game sounds like a solid 80, or even a 60 to 70 if you don’t like Street Fighter in the first place. You know, the kind of reviews a generally innovative game like Prince of Perisa received last year. But so far it sounds like reviewers are gushing over their own fond child hood memories rather than the product in front of them. I really hope I’m just being cynical.