Virtua Fighter vs tekken

i am sick to my teeth of reading crappy Tekken vs Virtua Fighter artacles in playstaion mags. The all have the same crapy shallow compare graphic and amout of charcter in the games . one ps2 mag said ( i cant rember what mag as all ps mags seem the same to me) ' who will bother to play with the monk guy as he will be the most boring charcter!' shows you there lack of knowlege ( sorry about my spelling) that the brain dead staff of the ps mag have about fighting games, as shaolin monks have been the stable of kung fu movies for years and most fighting game fans are into kung fu movies as well so will play him because of that. apart form a lot of tekken fans as they dont even know who bruce lee and jackie chan are i know i see a lot of them debate in forms, and dont get me started on about there rating of such crap games as the Bouncer!

'Strong body but a weak mind' Sam Seed from Drunken Masters

 

It's nothing to sweat about. Nobody over the age of 17 takes these magazines seriously, anyway.

Besides, I would argue that most people who play fighting games only do so very casually, and the dedicated gamers who master the fighters are a small minority. In my own experience (in Minnesota), most people who play a fighting game, be it Tekken, Street Fighter, Soul Calibur, or VF, will either 1) mindlessly pound buttons and hope something pretty pops out, or 2) learn two or three moves and then repeat those same moves OVER and OVER.

-----
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How the elephant got in my pajamas, I don't know."
-- Groucho Marx

 

well i think mags full of shit helped sell the playstaion

'Strong body but a weak mind' Sam Seed from Drunken Masters

 

I don't agree with that at all. I think it was great software that sold the Playstation. WipeOut, Twisted Metal, Resident Evil, Parappa the Rapper, Tomb Raider (the first), Tony Hawk, Ape Escape, Metal Gear Solid. And, of course, all those great classic game compilations (Namco Museum, Williams Arcade) and updates (Tempest X3).

-----
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How the elephant got in my pajamas, I don't know."
-- Groucho Marx

 

Actually I think you're both right... the PSX had (has?) some great games -- like those you mentioned. But the Saturn had great games too... I mean nothing touches NiGHTs, Panzer Dragoon, Burning Rangers, Sega Rally and, of course, VF2.

The difference was largely marketing. Sony were _very_ smart in their marketing of the PSX, selling it like a hip clubbing accessory for 20-somethings (remember the "wipeout" ads?) as opposed to a traditional video game console.

Sega, for all their great games, has always sucked at marketing. The Dreamcast is another great example of that (and that was _good_ for them).

Hehe now I've reminded myself of Fighter's Megamix on the Saturn. VF vs. Fighting Vipers... what were they thinking?

grib.

 

Son'y product have always ended up being culture artefacts.
Something abt owning a Sony product that makes the ocnsumer real proud...

I.E 'Dude, I JUST GOT A WEGA...WHOOOHOOOO!!!!!!'

<font color=red>~~~ 'back off feather brain, or u can stick around and find out the hard way!/versus/images/icons/mad.gif~~~'

 

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>

Sega, for all their great games, has always sucked at marketing.

<hr></blockquote>


Wha? Remember the great Genesis ads in the early 90s? One of Sega's biggest strengths back then was its advertising and marketing. But I agree that since then, they've gone downhill, though the early DC commercials were nice.

 

I bought a Saturn the summer it came out, along with copies of Virtua Fighter, Panzer Dragoon, and Bug. I stuck with the machine through thick and thin for many a moon. You're right, there are a good number of terrific titles for that little machine. But overall, I think the Saturn was a total mess. The hardware was poorly designed, and nobody outside Sega's major studios could get any decent results out of the machine. Yes, the marketing was terrible, Sega had seriously burned retailers with the surprise summer launch, consumers were weary after Sega CD/32X, and (lest we forget) the console was horribly overpriced at $400. By the time it came down to match the PSX's $300, the momentum was already in full-swing.

That's not to say Sega Saturn was anything less than a great place to play some terrific games. As long as you enjoy it, that's great.

-----
"One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. How the elephant got in my pajamas, I don't know."
-- Groucho Marx

 

Haha that's so true -- no-one but Sega ever got results out of the Saturn (except for some 2D stuff). But the results the internal teams got were incredible. Remember that VF2 was _high-res_, and ran at a rock solid 60FPS. No-one got anything like that out of the PSX.

I think VF2 on the Saturn is a high watermark of console gaming. My god I played that a lot I had a reliable 2/3 SPoD on a standard Saturn gamepad

 

OK I concede the early Genesis ads (although I lived in Australia then, and we didn't really get them). Sega trivia: the Genesis was called the Megadrive in Australia (in all the PAL territories, I assume).

As for DC ads, I can't agree. "It's thinking"? WTF was that all about? All they had to do was show 20 seconds of Soul Calibur -- still head and shoulders above nearly anything PS2 in terms of overall look and especially animation. Or Sega Rally 2. Or any of the other great looking games they had. Instead they cooked up a wacky and confusing "it's thinking" campaign that had little or nothing to do with games (as far as I could tell, anyway...)

grib.

 

Yeah, it's true. But I don't begrudge them that becuase they did it the hard way. Sony have built up a reputation for quality by _being_ quality. Mostly...

 

Sony have built up a reputation for quality by _being_ quality

True, true. Except for the Playstation which is guaranteed to break within 18 months of purchase (or your money back).

 

Sony is NOT about quality, but they are about "innovation." Namesly features. Innovation and representation (of Japan).

Take it as you will, but keep in mind that they are neither about quality nor service. In so many fields, their products have been known to break down, but their products do usually have very interesting features and attractions to keep us buying them off store shelves (as well as pushing some of the industries to match the features). Features and quality are two different scales.

I don't know if I've ever really heard of them as having a reputation for quality though.

-Chanchai

 

Sony is NOT about quality, but they are about "innovation."

Well, that all depends what exactly you mean by 'about'. They do try to be innovative, and are successful in doing so i.m.o..

However, I do think that Sony also strive to make genuinely top quality products. If you take a look at TVs, you would be hard-pushed to find a better quality system than a top-whack Sony model (unless you are a millionaire or something; in which case you'd probably have one custom made by Sony anyway).

And even less expensive items such as Walkmans could be discussed here. I mean, not every Sony Walkman is of 5 star quality, but I'd wager that a £35 Sony would last you at least as long as anything else for that money, and would be of at least equal sound and build quality...

 

Well... I don't know if I could judge the overall quality of something when taking a look at it. Your Playstation example for instance, looks bloody fine when I was at the store. Some people had theirs break down, but it wasn't when they were just looking at it at first glance. Perhaps it depends on who you ask, but to my knowledge, Sony televisions have good quality visuals (which imo is more about the innovation than the term "quality"), tons of features, but break down sooner than many other TVs as far as I know. Heaven knows how many Sony TVs I've been through (so I'm exagerating, I've only had major problems with a 62" and a total breakdown of a 40" with moderate use--all within 2 years). Playstations breaking down within a few years as well. I've gone through enough Sony receivers as well with the current one just randomly turning itself on and off with a nice signal burst coming out the speaker each time (thus I have to plug and unplug it instead of use the on/off switch--this all happening while I'm away from my system for less than a year).

It would be narrow minded to think that my experiences is enough to come to this conclusion, but a combination of other accounts, a "reputation" of breakdowns (not limited to PSX and PS2 units), and a look at mission statements and company focuses has me under this impression which I represent.

I honestly praise a lot of the technology that Sony presents in its various ventures, love Trinatrons (except that blasted line across the screen on all trinatron monitors), Vega TVs look damn good without being hi definition, so on and so on.

It could just be a miscomunication, but I believe that quality includes durability. I feel that the features and "presentation qualities" represent the technology more.

Just my view.

Anyways... VF vs. Tekken... I enjoy both, like VF way more, don't care about the rivalry or whatever that the public puts between them. They're different enough from each other in so many ways and it is indeed ugly seeing Tekken played like VF and VF played like Tekken, so what do you really want to compare? Just how much one game suits your style more than the other? If that floats your boat I guess.

-Chanchai

 

Hehe. Your first paragraph is based on a misunderstanding. When I said 'If you take a look at TVs...', I meant 'Let's use TVs as an example', not 'Let's judge TVs just by physically looking at them'.


I'm sorry to hear that you've had such bad luck with Sony products, but the statement,

'Sony televisions......break down sooner than many other TVs as far as I know'

...is strange to me because Sony TVs are generally of extremely high quality. Sony TVs rule!


Trust me on this one. My dad is a 'TV guy' and has been for years. He knows his stuff, and it's weird how you argue by making generalisations based on a few Sony breakdowns.

No offence, nothing personal

 

No problems with my Sony TV after 2 years and one cross-country move from NYC to SF =)

My Playstation *did* break down after 18 months though, which I thought strange because I generally take very good care of computers and electronic equipment.

 

THANK YOU!

Sooo, we all agree then.
* Playstations are guaranteed to break.
* Sony TVs rule.

I mean, c'mon; how many of us still have fully operational Playstations that were bought in, say, '97 or earlier? Or, how many of us know of a PSX that has broken? It should be among well-known, commonly accepted worldwide statistics:

* 1 in 3 people suffer from cancer at some point in their life
* Pamela Anderson has big tits
* Eating British Beef will lead to permanent brain damage within 48 hours
* All Danish people eat bacon for breakfast, lunch and dinner, 365 days of the year without fail
* 1 in 2 people know of someone who's Sony Playstation has broken within 18 months of purchase

 

I still have some v.s reviews in some old magazines.
German off course. Vf 1 Remix v.s Tekken : Listen to this: " Well i find Tekken better then VF-Remix, mainly because you have the double amount of characters "

Armor King v.s King...... hehehehehe
Nina v.s Michele.......hehehehehe
Jack v.s Power Jack......hehehehe
Law v.s Lee........hehehehehe



And this went on, main reason for some crap magazines, why SC is better then DA2 : Amount of characters, hehehehe
No other factors needed........


Armor King v.s King...... hehehehehe
Nina v.s Michele.......hehehehehe
Jack v.s Power Jack......hehehehe
Law v.s Lee........hehehehehe

I hate people who talk about fighting games like they were competent(experts), and then they have such an influence on people, writing such shit

 

Jack v.s Power Jack

There is no 'Power Jack' in Tekken...