• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Street Fighter VI expectations and predictions, when will it be announced, when will it realease and what do you expect

xiskza

Member
Nov 26, 2020
272
652
350
Lol at the SF4 love blinders going on in this thread. People didnt like that game when it came out almost just as much as SF5, and even the pros dont look back at it fondly these days. It was successful cause it resurrected the FCG community and sold based on SF2 nostalgia.

SF3 also suffered the same fate with the love blinders, but at least it had the backing of the pros even when the general public didnt gel with it at the time.

Anyway, SF5 is far from their best entry, but its definitely a good entry in the series with easily the best roster.

SF6 really needs to pull ahead of the SF3 timeline once and for all. I know Luke will be back, and after seeing the directors tweets, we're really heading into Neo Shadaloo/G territory it seems.
 
Last edited:
  • Fire
Reactions: Reizo Ryuu

Mess

Member
Jan 12, 2021
83
79
200
The gameplay will be a new variation of the SF formula as is tradition.

My wishlist:
  • a good netcode and crossplay accross PC/Playstation/XBox
  • interesting new mechanics
  • roster can be small (8-10) but with interesting characters - some newcomer-friendly ones, some execution heavy ones, proper zoners, rushdown, you name it
tl;dr: give us a solid basis and I'll be a happy camper.
 

Kokoloko85

Member
Sep 26, 2019
4,605
5,735
485
Capcom Board of Directors

Guy 1
"We making a ton of money with costumes we need to double Chunli costume output"

Guy 2
"Let's make a 2D game we can't have costumes as it's 2D"

Guy 1
"Sounds line a great idea let's do that'

Im only suggesting what would make the game look better.
Costumes on ugly clay fighter looking characters or actual good 2D looking fighter game. I know which I would choose.…
 

KAL2006

Banned
Feb 6, 2009
12,899
2,984
1,370
UK
Im only suggesting what would make the game look better.
Costumes on ugly clay fighter looking characters or actual good 2D looking fighter game. I know which I would choose.…

This is a expectations and predictions thread not your Street Fighter game in your dreams.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kokoloko85
Aug 28, 2019
5,238
10,434
720
www.instagram.com
Some parts of SFV story already are after SF3. Seems SF6 is going to happen mainly after SF3 but will feature time travelling to rewrite stuff from the past. I think they will use this excuse to both continue the events after SF3 and to reboot -at least the early chapters of the SF canon-.


As I remember the leaked document (written in early 2020) mentioned Oct-Dec 2022 release for PS4, PS5, XBO, Xbox Series and PC. It's fair to assume that as usually happens will get delayed, specially now with Covid and with the huge hacker attack they suffered, which included SF6 related documents and mails.

They also target PS4 and XBO because over 2/3 of the PS and Xbox fanbase still will be in the previous generation at the moment of its release and because this type of games can be easily scaled back or up.

Well, that is kind of disappointing. Sure there are visual aspects of the game that could be scaled up or down for the hardware but it effectively rules out designing game mechanics to take advantage of, say, 120 Hz display options. Attack frame data built around 120 Hz in ways that could add more depth to the moves, that is kind of the stuff you're not going to get by also natively supporting last-gen hardware. Or having a character select that's actually dynamic and feels lived-in; a game like Kasumi Ninja is terrible and a joke but at least it had a novel idea in the character select which hasn't been attempted since because the genre just fell into a certain way of doing things. Meanwhile tho some hero shooters ended up ironically building upon and improving that type of thing and are better off for it.

Truth is only the casual players will play this or any 9th-gen fighter on PS4 and XBO and they aren't going to care for the competitive side of things, so there's no reason for Capcom to push native ports to those systems. For Xbox this is easy enough since they have now rolled out xCloud streaming to XBO so players there can simply play it via streaming and it would be good enough for them. PlayStation however doesn't have a similar service set up yet for PS4 to stream PS5 games via cloud, but it would be very good if they do so.

That way burden is taken off the dev teams to make additional native builds for older systems, redirecting those would-be resources to the current-gen native options, frees up game design constraints, and players on the older platforms (who are going to be the more casual by default) won't perceive a difference playing the games via the cloud vs. native (plus, Sony & Microsoft get additional sub revenue from those players, for example xCloud streaming being a part of GPU (they may provide it separately later tho)).

Lol at the SF4 love blinders going on in this thread. People didnt like that game when it came out almost just as much as SF5, and even the pros dont look back at it fondly these days. It was successful cause it resurrected the FCG community and sold based on SF2 nostalgia.

Actually I've seen quite a few pros favor SFIV over V, let alone just players in the FGC. Punk, Sonic Sol, Phantom Mira etc. there's a good amount who'd prefer SF4 over 5. Extends to some of the Japanese players too like Poongko. Almost always their reasons are because the skill ceiling was higher and player expression was better, and defensive options were better.

Which is just their opinion, sure, but it's more prevalent in the FGC than you might first think. I do hate tho the idea SF4 "revived" the FGC, or especially fighting games as a whole. Okay so entries at tournaments was probably lower pre-SF4 but there were still a lot of tournaments and certain franchises like Virtua Fighter saw the height of their tournament entries during that "dark ages" period. Other series like Tekken saw some of their best entries in that period too (Tekken 5, Dark Resurrection), IP like KOF, Guilty Gear flourished and Mortal Kombat had a comeback during that time too. DOA was doing well, etc.

Basically when people say "fighting games were dead" during then they really mean anything Capcom-related because outside of MvC2 and CvS2 they did practically nothing until SF4. But that doesn't mean the genre was dead during that time or the FGC died, either. That said tho yeah SF4 did help breath some new life and attention to the genre and scene, not taking that away from it.
SF3 also suffered the same fate with the love blinders, but at least it had the backing of the pros even when the general public didnt gel with it at the time.

Anyway, SF5 is far from their best entry, but its definitely a good entry in the series with easily the best roster.

SF6 really needs to pull ahead of the SF3 timeline once and for all. I know Luke will be back, and after seeing the directors tweets, we're really heading into Neo Shadaloo/G territory it seems.

Well the Japanese pros dug SF3 for sure, not so much Western ones tho. IMO I think 3S in particular is kind of overrated; parry spam is real and the game doesn't have very good balance among the cast. Also the OST as a whole and the background art are weaker than 2I (but I do really like some tunes and backgrounds in 3S). Still tho it got a lot of things right.

Agreed that story-wise they need to move past 3/3S by now. Capcom's probably scared it will mean needing to retire a lot of the SF2 old guard. I mean, they probably would, but they could do it the right way this time versus how they tried with SF3. Make Ryu, Ken, Chun-Li etc. grandpa/grandma age (or at least into their early/mid '60s) and looking older but all of them have lineage that can take their place. That little orphan girl with Chun in V and 3S for example, just age her to a young adult and make her the new Chun-Li, have Chun-Li be her mentor. Mel can basically become the new Ken, etc.

They can even have those older SF2 etc. characters in as playable, but make it clear it's a passing of the torch going forward. Plus if they move it past 3S storyline-wise they can actually have the old guard develop new tech in a way that makes sense canonically and their protege basically using that new tech in their own developing style.

I really hate to just have one use to that bar with a super move or uses it as an ex move. To me it makes the game more accessible while maintaining all the complexity of the game. Something like easy to enter, hard to master like situation.

Still kind of wonder why they haven't gone back to that idea for a SF game. I guess for some characters the V-System is meant to emulate the idea; Akuma can do Raging Demon when in V-Trigger for example.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Mabdia

Mess

Member
Jan 12, 2021
83
79
200
A- too soon

B- future of fighting games dont look good with all the dlc and passes

SF5 is in a very good spot and ye it's too soon imo. I'd rather have capcom release another fighting game (Darkstalkers 4 would be the dream but MVC4 or whatever could do) and release SF6 late 2023.

I don't get the hate for DLC in fighting games tbh. If you bought SF5 at launch and are let's say a Chun-Li main you can still play it wih everyone at no additionnal cost. If you've moved main a few times you could do it easily on fight money alone. If you play all characters then ye you had to buy the DLC but then you've prolly spent hundred if not thousands of hours on the game so is it really such a bad value? No online population fragmentation is the way to go imo.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Celcius

Celcius

°Temp. member
Mar 11, 2009
8,430
2,912
1,455
I don’t want it to be cross gen but I’m sure it will be with the way things are going
 

Mabdia

Member
Dec 3, 2020
413
448
320
36
Brazil
Still kind of wonder why they haven't gone back to that idea for a SF game. I guess for some characters the V-System is meant to emulate the idea; Akuma can do Raging Demon when in V-Trigger for example.

That helps a little. But isn't enough. Just hope to see the game 6th mainline being really good.
 

Renoir

Member
May 24, 2010
1,335
470
980
Atlanta GA
i wish the gameplay brought something like the parry back. Something that if I practice and get good I feel like a badass doing it. mind you I understand you can practice a combo and be a badass, but something about the parry...
I also wish for like more animation. the characters look so stiff. When you look at the animation in Mark of the wolf.. man that shit is beautiful. Wish they could translate that into 3d.
 

KAL2006

Banned
Feb 6, 2009
12,899
2,984
1,370
UK
Remember the days of mvc 2 where you get a huge roster from the get go...

Imagine mvc 2 released today

the xmen season pack
the avengers season pack
the resident evil pack
etc..

Would you prefer Capcom just bring the roster of Street Fighter V back reusing the same character models and just add an additional 25 characters on top. After all MvC2 was just a asset reuse with a few new sprites.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
14,792
7,043
1,895
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Well, that is kind of disappointing. Sure there are visual aspects of the game that could be scaled up or down for the hardware but it effectively rules out designing game mechanics to take advantage of, say, 120 Hz display options. Attack frame data built around 120 Hz in ways that could add more depth to the moves, that is kind of the stuff you're not going to get by also natively supporting last-gen hardware.
120Hz would be an issue for fighting games because they are very focused on latency and that latency already is an issue with 60Hz for when playing online because you need to send a lot of data as fast as possible and to have as much time as possible to receive, process and rectify info got from th other player. With 120 they would have double of data to send and synchronize so more time and rollback trickery would be needed and would be more noticiable the difference of playing online vs offline. And frame data is already too complex and difficult to learn and master at 60Hz, it would be even more difficult at 120Hz.

I think it would be a better idea to keep it at 60Hz and focus that extra horsepower instead on getting native 4K @ steady 60fps with great visuals and a very low input lag.

Truth is only the casual players will play this or any 9th-gen fighter on PS4 and XBO and they aren't going to care for the competitive side of things, so there's no reason for Capcom to push native ports to those systems. For Xbox this is easy enough since they have now rolled out xCloud streaming to XBO so players there can simply play it via streaming and it would be good enough for them. PlayStation however doesn't have a similar service set up yet for PS4 to stream PS5 games via cloud, but it would be very good if they do so.
Almost 6 years after launch SFV keeps consistently selling 200K-300K every quarter, and since they keep releasing new DLC I assume it's because people continue buying it. I'd say the main reason behind these long legs is is -in addition to frequent update with fixes, tweaks, additions and improvements- the support and visibility the game got via eSports: fans of the genre got interested over time on the game and bought it.

In the competitive side, Street Fighter always has been one of the biggest if not the biggest franchise of traditional fighting games. SFV got a bit of rejection at launch because it had some issues, but as they kept fixing and improving it their competitive side became stronger. Until covid happened, obviously. Capcom said they learnt from the SFV launch and don't want to repeat their mistakes in SF6, so pretty sure it will offer a more complete, polished package with proper online at launch, which combined with a multiplatform crossgen launch very likely will outsell SFV as the most successful Capcom fighting game home version SKU ever.

Casuals are those who buy a game, play it a few hours spread maybe over a week or two, and leave it forever or at least for some months or years. SFV players seem to be fans invested on the game who play it for years and are interested on its eSports, so even if as players they aren't so good they follow the game and have some knowledge about it.

Regarding PS5 on PS Now, Sony said they will include PS5 games on PS Now. But as happens with PC ports, they only put some of their exclusives on their game subscriptions instead of all, an they typically put them there once they completed their sales cycle after at least a couple of years or so. So obviously it's too soon to see PS5 games on PS Now because PS5 was released only 1 year ago. And as happens in Gamepass it's very rare to see there new AAA multiplatform games day one. And even if it would be the case, streaming isn't an Xbox feature: it's a Game Pass Ultimate feature and a limited number of their userbase have it, I assume an even smaller userbase use the streaming and it doesn't feature all games.

And well, input lag is key for fighting games. Streaming has atrocious input lag for this genre so fighting game fans would reject any streaming only game, and in terms of business as of now it wouldn't make sense to make a AAA game streaming only, and to make it next gen only would mean to leave too much money on the table.

That way burden is taken off the dev teams to make additional native builds for older systems, redirecting those would-be resources to the current-gen native options, frees up game design constraints, and players on the older platforms (who are going to be the more casual by default) won't perceive a difference playing the games via the cloud vs. native (plus, Sony & Microsoft get additional sub revenue from those players, for example xCloud streaming being a part of GPU (they may provide it separately later tho)).
They make it crossgen because they know the big majority of their userbase will continue in the previous gen. It wouldn't be a good business for them to keep it next gen only. There aren't game design constraints for Street Fighter-like games, next gen only offers better visuals and shorter loading times plus minor things. Other than that, if it would be a PS5 full exclusive (which won't) then they also would take advantage of a better lowest common denominator wifi (but players still could play very distant of their router, to have a shitty router, a shitty internet connection or to play online while other device in the same wifi is streaming Netflix).

Fighting games aren't affected by streaming speeds, so are a great candidate for crossgen games: just render them at a lower native resolution keeping steady 60fps, disable some shiny visual stutf and they have the same game.

Actually I've seen quite a few pros favor SFIV over V
Yes, as I mentioned before it happened with every single SF since SF2' Champion Edition. Many people complains about the most recent SF saying it's crap and that the previous one was great and way better. Until they release the next one. Then they switch to say the newest one is crap and the previous one, that they kept saying it was so bad then they switch to say it was very good.

They don't dislike the game too much when they play it daily a lot of hours to the point they are some of the best players in the world. They would switch to another game. But they kept playing and as they played more they now say they love the game (it's that point of the SF cycle, they now got used to the current one, once SF6 gets released they won't like the changes and will say they would have prefered it to be like SFV). And well, there are millions of players, each one with their own opinion.

Okay so entries at tournaments was probably lower pre-SF4 but there were still a lot of tournaments and certain franchises like Virtua Fighter saw the height of their tournament entries during that "dark ages" period. Other series like Tekken saw some of their best entries in that period too (Tekken 5, Dark Resurrection), IP like KOF, Guilty Gear flourished and Mortal Kombat had a comeback during that time too. DOA was doing well, etc.
Tekken 7 pretty likely will outsell soon Tekken 3 as the best selling game in the series. MKX and MK11 are the best selling ones in the series. They both are the only ones who performed decently in sales during the dark pre-SFIV period, but also got highly boosted with the SFIV revival.

All the other series like KOF, Guilty Gear, Soul Calibur, Blazblue or DOA never had good sales, always have been way under MK, Tekken and SF. Guilty Gear Strive seems that now had a great launch and pretty likely will become the best selling (non DBZ) ever ARC Sys game thanks to its quality but also the popularity boost that gave them the Dragon Ball FighterZ IP. Even if you include here Smash is now performing way better than ever had in the franchise. SFIV started a 2nd golden age for the genre that is becoming the top golden age of the genre.

And part of that is because there is way more people now going to tournaments, watching them online and streaming gameplay.

Basically when people say "fighting games were dead" during then they really mean anything Capcom-related because outside of MvC2 and CvS2 they did practically nothing until SF4.
They said that because sales were really bad for most games in the genre during that period (this includes MvC2 and CvS2), which caused to have way less new big games in the genre.

But that doesn't mean the genre was dead during that time or the FGC died, either. That said tho yeah SF4 did help breath some new life and attention to the genre and scene, not taking that away from it.
Yes, the FGC kept playing the games during the dark period even if it was a way smaller niche than before. The SFIV boom -supported by its eSports- caused the FGC to grow to the point now is bigger than ever.

Well the Japanese pros dug SF3 for sure, not so much Western ones tho. IMO I think 3S in particular is kind of overrated; parry spam is real and the game doesn't have very good balance among the cast. Also the OST as a whole and the background art are weaker than 2I (but I do really like some tunes and backgrounds in 3S). Still tho it got a lot of things right.
I think 3S is probably the pinnacle of fighting games, the most polished one. In terms of OST I prefer the SF2 or SFEX1 style and obviously SF2 WW was the most influential and iconic, but I think 3S is my favorite one in terms of gameplay.

Agreed that story-wise they need to move past 3/3S by now. Capcom's probably scared it will mean needing to retire a lot of the SF2 old guard. I mean, they probably would, but they could do it the right way this time versus how they tried with SF3. Make Ryu, Ken, Chun-Li etc. grandpa/grandma age (or at least into their early/mid '60s) and looking older but all of them have lineage that can take their place. That little orphan girl with Chun in V and 3S for example, just age her to a young adult and make her the new Chun-Li, have Chun-Li be her mentor. Mel can basically become the new Ken, etc.
Nah, they never cared about changing or retconning what needed to fit what they wanted in the games. They even resurrected at least three guys, and one of them multiple times. SFV storyline canon happens just before and just after SF3, and seems SF6 will happen just after SFV, which means very shortly after SF3. They could make a 65 years old Chun to look like as if she was 30. I think they will simply avoid mentioning their age.

This means Ryu, Ken, Chun and so on will be able to keep the look they had in SF3, SFV or even SFIV. People will accept more iconic characters if they have their iconic looks, so I think they won't change them too much. To change them too much is risky (see banana Ken's case) so I think they will keep them with a conservative design and will keep risky changes for secondary costumes, which I'm pretty sure will be a lot of them.

I think they will give some protagonism to newer generations like Sean, that girl or Luke (Mel would be too young if it's set just after SFV/SF3 as I think), but I think we'll see returning people from the older generation because they won't want to repeat the same mistake they had in SF3 keeping the focus too far away from their iconic characters.

They can even have those older SF2 etc. characters in as playable, but make it clear it's a passing of the torch going forward. Plus if they move it past 3S storyline-wise they can actually have the old guard develop new tech in a way that makes sense canonically and their protege basically using that new tech in their own developing style.
I think they won't remove the most popular characters, like the SF2 ones. Maybe not at launch, but they will be included in the game. They did a great job in SFV redesigning gameplay wise many characters to make them more unique and differentiated from the other characters, and at the same time they included disciples of old characters that offered new interesting stuff and were different enough. I think they will continue doing this in SF6
B- future of fighting games dont look good with all the dlc and passes
The future of fighting game looks better than ever: most franchises are selling more than they ever had and the DLC and passes system allows you to don't split the userbase into different game updates while to continue playing spending less money. Specially in SFV where all gameplay related updates and changes or game modes are free for everyone and you were able to unlock by playing a few hours at dumb difficulty like half of the DLC cast.

Would you prefer Capcom just bring the roster of Street Fighter V back reusing the same character models and just add an additional 25 characters on top. After all MvC2 was just a asset reuse with a few new sprites.
I'd do that, to reuse characters from SFV, SFIV, SFxT and some guest from UMvC3. Just tweak a bit their gameplay and animations, upgrade a bit their 3D models and textures and use shaders to give it a slightly different look (I'd try to go the ARC Sys route and try achieve an art style somewhat similar to SF3 and SF Alpha).
 
Last edited:

KAL2006

Banned
Feb 6, 2009
12,899
2,984
1,370
UK
So next week we have Luke demonstration and I assume he will release shortly after the demonstration in that week of week after.

Its definitely between Game Awards and Capcom Cup Finals in March when we see Street Fighter VI.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
14,792
7,043
1,895
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
So next week we have Luke demonstration and I assume he will release shortly after the demonstration in that week of week after.

Its definitely between Game Awards and Capcom Cup Finals in March when we see Street Fighter VI.
Seeing Sony having supported SFV eSports and even ended buying EVO, I assume that if Sony didn't sign an exclusive (seems to be multiplaform and crossgen according to the leak) they would have signed a marketing deal instead.

If it's the case, I think it means Sony will handle big/main announcements and pretty likely will do it using their channels: big game reveal at SFV EVO finals or at PlayStation Experience(if they finally have it)/big State of Play/PlayStation Showcase. Which is compatible with stuff handled by Capcom, like a teaser for Capcom Cup finals previous to a full reveal/exclusive? beta announcement at EVO finals.
 
Last edited:

KAL2006

Banned
Feb 6, 2009
12,899
2,984
1,370
UK
Seeing Sony having supported SFV eSports and even ended buying EVO, I assume that if Sony didn't sign an exclusive (seems to be multiplaform and crossgen according to the leak) they would have signed a marketing deal instead.

If it's the case, I think it means Sony will handle big/main announcements and pretty likely will do it using their channels: big game reveal at SFV EVO finals or at PlayStation Experience(if they finally have it)/big State of Play/PlayStation Showcase. Which is compatible with stuff handled by Capcom, like a teaser for Capcom Cup finals previous to a full reveal/exclusive? beta announcement at EVO finals.

I can see it being in a February State of Play and a more footage in March Capcom Cup. Evo is too late if they are aiming for February 2023 reveal.
 
Last edited:

Mess

Member
Jan 12, 2021
83
79
200
I feel EVO would be the best moment. Right before the SF5 grand finals.

I has more mainstream appeal than capcom cup and makes more sense than a random event like TGA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kyoji

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
14,792
7,043
1,895
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
I can see it being in a February State of Play and a more footage in March Capcom Cup. Evo is too late if they are aiming for February 2023 reveal.
They can make some small teaser in February/March and then a proper big reveal at EVO.

Originally it was internally scheduled for an October-December 2022 release. It's fair to assume that with covid, the big hack they suffered and the usual unexpected reasons it may have delayed. In case it has been delayed, we have no idea of the new release date. As I've been pointing out since years ago, February 2023 is the more likely date. But it may have been delayed more because it only would be a 3 months delay compared to their original release date and typically delays made when the release date isn't public are longer.
 
Aug 28, 2019
5,238
10,434
720
www.instagram.com
120Hz would be an issue for fighting games because they are very focused on latency and that latency already is an issue with 60Hz for when playing online because you need to send a lot of data as fast as possible and to have as much time as possible to receive, process and rectify info got from th other player. With 120 they would have double of data to send and synchronize so more time and rollback trickery would be needed and would be more noticiable the difference of playing online vs offline. And frame data is already too complex and difficult to learn and master at 60Hz, it would be even more difficult at 120Hz.

I think it would be a better idea to keep it at 60Hz and focus that extra horsepower instead on getting native 4K @ steady 60fps with great visuals and a very low input lag.

Well for games that don't natively target for above 60 I've heard 120 Hz actually helps with latency, versus hurting it, because the inputs are able to be double-buffered on the server end. Additionally smoothness and frame pacing is better, helping with reactions. But this is with a hypothetical fighter programmed at 60 Hz, TBF.

I think, interestingly, sticking with this and still providing a 120 Hz mode could make input timings easier for more players, since they're basically getting a 2x input buffer for attacks that they don't have playing at 60 Hz. It's a natural way for companies to add in buffer windows for ease-of-use without compromising the game structure at the base 60 Hz. Almost sure if 120 Hz was available for displays when SFV came out originally, the team would've done this instead of what they actually ended up doing. And I'd like to think games like Samurai Showdown are a good showcase for what some of this functionality can provide, going forward.

Almost 6 years after launch SFV keeps consistently selling 200K-300K every quarter, and since they keep releasing new DLC I assume it's because people continue buying it. I'd say the main reason behind these long legs is is -in addition to frequent update with fixes, tweaks, additions and improvements- the support and visibility the game got via eSports: fans of the genre got interested over time on the game and bought it.

Right, but a couple things to consider here. One, most of those sales are on big discounts, so it's not necessarily the same as selling those numbers at full or near-full original MSRP. Secondly, while people buying the game itself factors somewhat into them doing more DLC, the bigger reason they keep doing DLC is because there's a large dedicated part of the install base buying the DLC itself. That's where the lionshare of SFV revenue is coming from, not game copies being sold, but it's turned out to be a great model for Capcom in fixing the game up from its troubled launch.

I agree that eSports (well, I want to say FGC, but this is a different conversation) has helped with visibility of the game, particularly tournaments getting streamed on Twitch, Youtube, etc. Also a lot of the pro players in the game, even Japanese ones, stream it pretty consistently so they're in a way helping to foster a larger community for a game which means more people who eventually buy the DLC content which is what Capcom really wants for the game at this point and I'd imagine for SF6 as well once that comes out.

In the competitive side, Street Fighter always has been one of the biggest if not the biggest franchise of traditional fighting games. SFV got a bit of rejection at launch because it had some issues, but as they kept fixing and improving it their competitive side became stronger. Until covid happened, obviously. Capcom said they learnt from the SFV launch and don't want to repeat their mistakes in SF6, so pretty sure it will offer a more complete, polished package with proper online at launch, which combined with a multiplatform crossgen launch very likely will outsell SFV as the most successful Capcom fighting game home version SKU ever.

Lol no, SFV got more than a bit of a rejection. The rejection was pretty severe from everyone not in the FGC once the problems became apparent. The Cinematic Story Mode (which they should've made more seasons for, as originally promised, IMO) helped give the game a boost a bit the summer (I think it was summer?) it came out, but that didn't last. The game just kind of limped along in terms of mainstream attention and whatnot until the Season 2 update came along, which is also where I think some of the first big gameplay updates were done (IIRC, the input frame buffer was reduced a few frames because at first it was like 8-9 frames and now it's 3 frames of buffer in the game).

If Capcom's really learned from SFV's abysmal launch, then they'll make sure the game's got some genuine single-player/casual-orientated content in there Day-1. I'm talking a robust Arcade mode, a relaunch of the Cinematic Story mode, multiple staple and a few new intermission Arcade mode mini-games, a starter art gallery and OST library, ending cinematics etc. They'll make sure the online is working out of the gate. They'll make sure not to dumb down the game mechanics to try luring in more beginners (and instead do what you really need to do for getting them in, much better tutorials and some MP in-game currency/ranking system to incentivize skilled players to coach and help newcomers). They'll make sure features primed for online like Tournament Mode are able to be used as such Day 1, etc.

Casuals are those who buy a game, play it a few hours spread maybe over a week or two, and leave it forever or at least for some months or years. SFV players seem to be fans invested on the game who play it for years and are interested on its eSports, so even if as players they aren't so good they follow the game and have some knowledge about it.

Right, which makes it all the more reason to NOT release PS4 or XBO native versions of the game. Most of the casuals of these type of games tend to be core-casual console gamers on average; this means while they aren't there Day 1 or in the first year or two for a new console, they jump in within the latter part of Year 2 through to the Year 4 period of a console's lifecycle.

SF6 is launching in late Year 2/early Year 3 of the current console generation, which is when most of the casuals who go for games like SF based on what the hardcore players of the scene are doing, actually make the transition to the newer consoles. I can almost guarantee most of them will not still be stuck on PS4s or XBOs by late 2022, which is when I'm personally thinking SF6 will come out. Besides, if Capcom's business model for the game really revolves around DLC content sales, it doesn't necessarily matter if they get big sales copies numbers Day 1; they can get consistent modest sales copies numbers months after launch while refreshing interest in the game with new DLC content that most of the players in the install base end up buying.

This works especially well if the game itself is great out of the gate because that means it will be able to hold price value for a longer period of time, something SFV wasn't able to do for various reasons.

Regarding PS5 on PS Now, Sony said they will include PS5 games on PS Now. But as happens with PC ports, they only put some of their exclusives on their game subscriptions instead of all, an they typically put them there once they completed their sales cycle after at least a couple of years or so. So obviously it's too soon to see PS5 games on PS Now because PS5 was released only 1 year ago. And as happens in Gamepass it's very rare to see there new AAA multiplatform games day one. And even if it would be the case, streaming isn't an Xbox feature: it's a Game Pass Ultimate feature and a limited number of their userbase have it, I assume an even smaller userbase use the streaming and it doesn't feature all games.

That's true, but it only really is an issue if the majority of the more casual types who buy into these types of fighters happen to be casual gamer types as a whole, but I don't think that's actually the case. It's like how someone can be a casual gamer on the whole but be hardcore into Animal Crossing; if they normally wait a few years before buying a new Nintendo system, but a new Animal Crossing comes Day 1, they're likely to just buy the console Day 1 just to play Animal Crossing. Doesn't make the m a hardcore/core gamer necessarily overall, but things like that happen.

All the same I think due to the general nature of fighting games, a lot of whoever are "casuals" to the genre are likely at least core-casual gamers. This means they may not typically buy a new console at launch or the first year or two, but they don't necessarily wait until it's at its cheapest price, either. They probably tend to come in starting during the midway period of a platform's lifecycle, and SF6's release will largely coincide with that period for them.

And well, input lag is key for fighting games. Streaming has atrocious input lag for this genre so fighting game fans would reject any streaming only game, and in terms of business as of now it wouldn't make sense to make a AAA game streaming only, and to make it next gen only would mean to leave too much money on the table.

Yeah, core/hardcore fighting game fans won't want to play it via streaming, this is true. But the very casual/mainstream ones who will stay on PS4/XBO hardware by the time SF6 launches? They honestly don't care and won't play at a high enough level to notice a difference. They'll just to want to play it as a fun game for a little while, won't matter to them if it's native or streamed.

So why do a native port for them when the majority of fighting game casuals will move over to buy current-gen system at or around the time SF6 releases, anyway? It's just a bit of waste of resources at that point. Whether or not the streaming solution is readily available to the very casual/mainstream types on older systems isn't really a point to focus on that much, because they're not necessarily high-value customers of the fighting game install base in the first place.

In the case those sorts just don't play the game for a few years until they finally jump into a current-gen system later in the lifecycle (Years 5 - 7+), Capcom isn't actually losing much in revenue or profit from them, though those sort of players will still serve as useful to other measurable metrics for the game by the time they happen to jump in. Additionally, their not playing the game until much later predicates itself on the likelihood of Microsoft & Sony not providing streaming in a more affordable package. However for Microsoft at least it's almost a guarantee they will decouple xCloud from GamePass Ultimate sometime in the near future; even if it's not until later 2022 or sometime 2023, it's likely going to happen. With Sony it's more up-in-the-air but considering their own strategy and most in the SFV install base (particularly those in the FGC) already upgrading from PS4 to PS5, having streaming as an option may not be as much of a priority there.

They make it crossgen because they know the big majority of their userbase will continue in the previous gen.

No, this isn't true. As a very general argument to justify why some companies as a whole are still supporting cross-gen natively, yes it has some merit. But in this specific case, I honestly don't think it holds true and gave some reasons as to why above.

It wouldn't be a good business for them to keep it next gen only. There aren't game design constraints for Street Fighter-like games, next gen only offers better visuals and shorter loading times plus minor things.

Not necessarily, though I will agree that it comes down to the game in question. Personally I see SOO much more potential for fighting games as a genre to expand template-wise beyond the basics of what was established firmly by the late '90s/early '00s which fighters as a whole are still utilizing today, but if I'm being honest the type of fighter to innovate fully in that space probably would not be one as so embedded in the current fabric of the genre as a Street Fighter.

Maybe we'll see some of that with the Riot games-developed LoL fighter, or some other fighter in the future. But for the bigger franchises (SF, MK, Injustice, Tekken, Smash etc.), they kind of don't have a reason to do that type of larger-scale innovation.

Other than that, if it would be a PS5 full exclusive (which won't) then they also would take advantage of a better lowest common denominator wifi (but players still could play very distant of their router, to have a shitty router, a shitty internet connection or to play online while other device in the same wifi is streaming Netflix).

Fighting games aren't affected by streaming speeds, so are a great candidate for crossgen games: just render them at a lower native resolution keeping steady 60fps, disable some shiny visual stutf and they have the same game.

Uh, this might be true in its own case, but doesn't this kind of contradict something you mentioned earlier?

About fighters being affected by latency of streaming? If you're supporting the idea that cross-gen native ports work because the dev can simply lower the resolution and VFX of the game on the older platform, then you have to support the idea of cross-gen streaming as a solution too, because you can do the exact same things with an instance of the game on older systems via cloud streaming!

Yes, as I mentioned before it happened with every single SF since SF2' Champion Edition. Many people complains about the most recent SF saying it's crap and that the previous one was great and way better. Until they release the next one. Then they switch to say the newest one is crap and the previous one, that they kept saying it was so bad then they switch to say it was very good.

Well that is a fixture of the SF community I will say that much.

They don't dislike the game too much when they play it daily a lot of hours to the point they are some of the best players in the world. They would switch to another game.

I don't think this is really the case for certain types of players. Like it or not, many pro players will stay glued to a game even if they dislike it at some core level, simply due to the income opportunities it provides at the tourney level. Same goes for certain commentators, too, actually. Add on top of that certain other visibility that may come with sticking to a certain game, which can boost one's online profile & brand name recognition, benefiting them with further career opportunities going forward, and it's really not as simple as just switching to another game for them.

A large segment of non-pro players will also generally still stick to the game, either out of habit or because they enjoy the players they follow and want to feel like they're part of that community in a direct way i.e playing the game. Some of them, even if they get sick of the game, desensitize themselves from feelings of stronger repulse and might just end up conditioning themselves to play the game for what fun they can derive casually, in spite of its issues.

But they kept playing and as they played more they now say they love the game (it's that point of the SF cycle, they now got used to the current one, once SF6 gets released they won't like the changes and will say they would have prefered it to be like SFV). And well, there are millions of players, each one with their own opinion.

True, and I'm not saying that the players who are still playing SFV aren't doing it out of sheer, genuine liking of it. I think a lot of them, casuals and pros alike, enjoy the game at least to some degree now, especially after the various game balance changes over the past few Seasons. But it's also important to keep in mind that it's not the only reason why various pro players, for example, are still invested in the game.

But if those "other" reasons happen to also translate into genuine liking of the game over time, then that's a net gain regardless.

Tekken 7 pretty likely will outsell soon Tekken 3 as the best selling game in the series. MKX and MK11 are the best selling ones in the series. They both are the only ones who performed decently in sales during the dark pre-SFIV period, but also got highly boosted with the SFIV revival.

Keep in mind when I say other fighting games "did well" during the supposed 'dark ages' pre-SFIV, I also mean in terms of game quality, or seeing big growth for their respective IP brands in various markets. KOF, GG, VF, DOA, Soul Calibur, MK, Tekken etc. all saw steady sales, increases in IP branding in various territories, and either general increases in quality or a return-to-form (Tekken, MK) during that period.

I also think we should take cultural impact into account here. Yes SFIV gave other games a boost and it revitalized a large segment of the scene and genre but if you look at actual sales they weren't as much as that impact perception would lead you to believe. Across all it's versions SFIV was around roughly 6.5 million LTD. Tekken 6, on only two platforms and only one version release, sold roughly 55% of that figure. MKX outsold SFIV that generation. And I'd personally argue that Tekken 3 was a bigger watershed moment for fighters on console (even if less of one overall than SF2 was for its day) than SFIV ended up being for console, though I think we can agree SFIV was a much bigger impact on the FGC/eSports scene than Tekken 3 (partly due to release timing and the technology of the era, TBF).

All the other series like KOF, Guilty Gear, Soul Calibur, Blazblue or DOA never had good sales, always have been way under MK, Tekken and SF. Guilty Gear Strive seems that now had a great launch and pretty likely will become the best selling (non DBZ) ever ARC Sys game thanks to its quality but also the popularity boost that gave them the Dragon Ball FighterZ IP. Even if you include here Smash is now performing way better than ever had in the franchise. SFIV started a 2nd golden age for the genre that is becoming the top golden age of the genre.

We have to define what "good sales" are, though, because not every game needs a certain sales number to be financially successful. That applies to KOF (which is actually insanely popular in Korea and Latin America, has been for decades), GG, SC, etc. DOA, at least the first two entries, didn't necessarily need SF/Tekken home sales #s because they had arcade revenues to gain and they saved arcade production costs by licensing out the Model 2 from Sega (and in DOA2's case, NAOMI again from Sega).

I'm not trying to discredit SFIV in all of this, but I do think it's a bit nebulous to say it "started" a 2nd golden age, because that 2nd golden age was already underway prior to its release, with games like Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection, VF5 and Tekken 6. Also depending on what one values out of fighters, we could argue if this current period of fighters is the "best" or not.

I mean, in terms of pure game mechanic polish and production budgets it's almost inarguable that it is. However, I personally miss the sheer variety of fighters like had been seen in the '90s. SNK for example had a myriad of fighters from KOF to Real Bout (Fatal Fury) to Last Blade to Samurai Showdown, and nowadays they've basically boiled down to KOF. Capcom had the Darkstalkers series, Rival Schools, Cyberbots, etc., and now they're basically just Street Fighter and maybe a VS game here and there. Not to mention other neat IP like Power Instinct, Breakers, Waku Waku 7, Star Gladiator, Psychic Force, Toshinden, Tobal, Erghiez, Bloody Roar, Fighting Vipers etc. falling to the wayside as the genre contracted partly due to contraction of arcades in the West.

Not trying to say those games are better than what we're getting now, as a lot lacked the amount of sheer character size, options and polish of the games coming these days. But the unique takes on various character archetypes/designs, the OSTs/music variety, visual creativity and stage artwork/design and basically the variety in amount of seemingly genuinely self-contained storyline universes for those games, I do miss that a lot. Games like Street Fighter now feel like they want to merge as many IP together as possible, consolidate everything into a single brand. Either that, or now we're getting this onslaught of metaverse VS-style fighters that feel like more trying to build onto a zeitgeist than having specific unique, creative visions to pursue.

That aspect of the modern era, it isn't very good IMO and I think it will age very poorly to boot. But, we shall see.

And part of that is because there is way more people now going to tournaments, watching them online and streaming gameplay.

Yeah that is one of the benefits of being a fighter in the modern era, some of these conveniences just weren't around back in the '90s or most of the '00s.

They said that because sales were really bad for most games in the genre during that period (this includes MvC2 and CvS2), which caused to have way less new big games in the genre.

Yes...from Capcom. But Namco, Sega, SNK, Midway etc. still supported with big releases. I do think the wavering in popularity for other Capcom IP tho like Resident Evil, and that "Project 5" stuff with Nintendo not working out as intended, impacted them in terms of doing another big fighter in the 6th gen, TBF. Notice that they didn't really commit to a SFIV until other games like RE4, Lost Planet, Monster Hunter etc. were hitting well commercially.

Yes, the FGC kept playing the games during the dark period even if it was a way smaller niche than before. The SFIV boom -supported by its eSports- caused the FGC to grow to the point now is bigger than ever.

I'm just saying SFIV wasn't the only fighting game that helped with getting the FGC to grow larger. It might've helped tip it over into a main stride but the FGC was already seeing growth pre-SFIV thanks to earlier 7th-gen fighters taking advantage of online netcode, for example.

I think 3S is probably the pinnacle of fighting games, the most polished one. In terms of OST I prefer the SF2 or SFEX1 style and obviously SF2 WW was the most influential and iconic, but I think 3S is my favorite one in terms of gameplay.

3S is a very love-hate relationship for me, personally. The fluidity of it is almost unmatched as far as 2D and even a lot of 3D fighters are concerned, but there are some things I actually preferred in 2I like the way that game handles air parries to reset back to neutral, which encouraged a stronger ground game for footsies. 3S parries are also pretty spammable as OSes once you get to a certain level, and the roster balance is fucked. Certain characters like Remy don't even have a reliable cross-up (as in, 99% of the time the one button that can maybe cross-up doesn't actually do it, very VERY contextual that one).

That said, I do prefer it over the SF2 games, it's probably down to timing for me though. I also prefer it and 2I over the Alpha series. 2I IMO has the best background art in the entire series and one of the best overall OSTs (the other ones I would put at that level are SF EX +Alpha and SF EX2). For SF6 I honestly would not mind mash of fully 3D characters (using SFV artstyle but improved) combined with pre-rendered highly detailed 3D stages as multi-layered 2D stages recreating the style of 2I stages in great detail.

Because 2I is the one SF with background stages I feel can actually compete with SNK's from the '90s/early '00s era (SNK I feel have the best background stages of any fighting game maker, in terms of 2D fighters at least).

Nah, they never cared about changing or retconning what needed to fit what they wanted in the games. They even resurrected at least three guys, and one of them multiple times. SFV storyline canon happens just before and just after SF3, and seems SF6 will happen just after SFV, which means very shortly after SF3. They could make a 65 years old Chun to look like as if she was 30. I think they will simply avoid mentioning their age.

That works for me, honestly. Tho I do think it's time for them to advance the series notably beyond SF3 timeline-wise. They can do it and do it right, time will tell if that's what Capcom wants.

This means Ryu, Ken, Chun and so on will be able to keep the look they had in SF3, SFV or even SFIV. People will accept more iconic characters if they have their iconic looks, so I think they won't change them too much. To change them too much is risky (see banana Ken's case) so I think they will keep them with a conservative design and will keep risky changes for secondary costumes, which I'm pretty sure will be a lot of them.

I think they will give some protagonism to newer generations like Sean, that girl or Luke (Mel would be too young if it's set just after SFV/SF3 as I think), but I think we'll see returning people from the older generation because they won't want to repeat the same mistake they had in SF3 keeping the focus too far away from their iconic characters.

Well I think SF3's bigger issue was they literally didn't bring back most of the old cast at all. They didn't even want Ryu and Ken back at first! If Capcom were to ever make a SF set well after SF3's storyline, they would absolutely need to do so in a way where the old cast can get a final hurrah and there's a smooth transition to clear proteges to replace them.

Maybe with a built-in character-specific tagging mechanic, you pick the usual character but they have a dedicated partner who you can tag in to do various techniques with, something like that. Very basic spitballing.

I think they won't remove the most popular characters, like the SF2 ones. Maybe not at launch, but they will be included in the game. They did a great job in SFV redesigning gameplay wise many characters to make them more unique and differentiated from the other characters, and at the same time they included disciples of old characters that offered new interesting stuff and were different enough. I think they will continue doing this in SF6

Yeah, they need to do more what they did with Dhalsim. They turned him from a somewhat boring character playstyle-wise to a very interesting one in SFV. Though I think they also did hurt some SF2 stalwarts along the way, such as Ryu, considering players who've used him forever like Daigo don't touch him as mains in the game.
 

Celcius

°Temp. member
Mar 11, 2009
8,430
2,912
1,455
Actually, 120hz support would be amazing. I'd love to see the fighter genre go in this direction, especially now that consoles are capable of this as well.
 

SSfox

Lies about why mods reply ban and warn me.
Jan 7, 2018
3,380
11,513
685
FFS Capcom please make all stages be perfect INPUT lag, one of main thing i hate about SF4 and specially SF5 is that there are a lot of laggy stages, usually the most detailed and beautiful ones, but honestly fuck this shit for real, if MK11 could do it why SF can't? Capcom better handle their shit better than this for SF6, i really hope they will en tout cas.
 

KAL2006

Banned
Feb 6, 2009
12,899
2,984
1,370
UK
FFS Capcom please make all stages be perfect INPUT lag, one of main thing i hate about SF4 and specially SF5 is that there are a lot of laggy stages, usually the most detailed and beautiful ones, but honestly fuck this shit for real, if MK11 could do it why SF can't? Capcom better handle their shit better than this for SF6, i really hope they will en tout cas.

Well if Street Fighter VI is cross gen like the leak has shown then I assume PS5 version will have enough headroom to not have laggy stages as the game will be made to run on much lower performing machines.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: SSfox

Rocco Schiavone

I am terrified of Microsoft and am always concerned about them.
Sep 5, 2020
1,112
3,179
520
This will be the third alpha game they release not the 4th.
Wtf are you talking about?




If there will be another Alpha Game it will be Alpha 4 not 3.
 
  • Like
Reactions: celsowmbr

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
14,792
7,043
1,895
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Well for games that don't natively target for above 60 I've heard 120 Hz actually helps with latency, versus hurting it, because the inputs are able to be double-buffered on the server end. Additionally smoothness and frame pacing is better, helping with reactions. But this is with a hypothetical fighter programmed at 60 Hz, TBF.

I think, interestingly, sticking with this and still providing a 120 Hz mode could make input timings easier for more players, since they're basically getting a 2x input buffer for attacks that they don't have playing at 60 Hz. It's a natural way for companies to add in buffer windows for ease-of-use without compromising the game structure at the base 60 Hz. Almost sure if 120 Hz was available for displays when SFV came out originally, the team would've done this instead of what they actually ended up doing. And I'd like to think games like Samurai Showdown are a good showcase for what some of this functionality can provide, going forward.
Fighting games traditionally are P2P during battles to reduce latency. 120Hz would mean to process, send, predict and fix more data. So to play offline would mean less latency, but more for online. Or to be more precise: it would be more noticiable. With a smaller framerate you have more time to receive and process data until the next time, and once you fix your rollback prediction, with a smaller framerate you'd correct less frames.

Other genres like racing, sports, PVE or coop shooters, turn based games etc don't need to be that precise and quick to show the results of you and you rival's inputs. They have more time to fix the wrong predictions and synchronize everything or to hide lag so when done is less noticiable. So for these other games 120Hz is better for online too.

You may have noticed that they have been removing the 1 frame and 2 frame (in 60fps/Hz games) reaction windows in moves and mechanics for most relatively recent fighting games. It's because this time window is too small when playing online. It's because the time the data is sent to you, processed and drawn takes more than two frames (in a 60Hz/fps game, not including here your time to react). So reaction windows went to 3 -and specially above- to be able to play online in better conditions. Who knows if in the future they will move it to 4 and up.

Right, but a couple things to consider here. One, most of those sales are on big discounts, so it's not necessarily the same as selling those numbers at full or near-full original MSRP. Secondly, while people buying the game itself factors somewhat into them doing more DLC, the bigger reason they keep doing DLC is because there's a large dedicated part of the install base buying the DLC itself. That's where the lionshare of SFV revenue is coming from, not game copies being sold, but it's turned out to be a great model for Capcom in fixing the game up from its troubled launch.
I agree that they made most of their money from DLC. So in addition to become maybe at the end of this FY their best selling game ever and a top 10 best selling game ever in Capcom history, they will have made more money with DLC than with sales (something btw common in Gaas). So yes, they must be very happy with it even if it had a rocky start. That comeback was enough to be highlighted as the cover story for the fiscal year report sent to their investors, the year where they also had the stunning MHW crazy debut to the point the biggest selling game ever (with no discounts or DLC).

I agree that eSports (well, I want to say FGC, but this is a different conversation) has helped with visibility of the game, particularly tournaments getting streamed on Twitch, Youtube, etc. Also a lot of the pro players in the game, even Japanese ones, stream it pretty consistently so they're in a way helping to foster a larger community for a game which means more people who eventually buy the DLC content which is what Capcom really wants for the game at this point and I'd imagine for SF6 as well once that comes out.
Yes, in fact myself I almost don't play anymore but continue watching tournaments and proplayer personal streams or youtube videos and they make me go back the the game.

Lol no, SFV got more than a bit of a rejection. The rejection was pretty severe from everyone not in the FGC once the problems became apparent. The Cinematic Story Mode (which they should've made more seasons for, as originally promised, IMO) helped give the game a boost a bit the summer (I think it was summer?) it came out, but that didn't last. The game just kind of limped along in terms of mainstream attention and whatnot until the Season 2 update came along, which is also where I think some of the first big gameplay updates were done (IIRC, the input frame buffer was reduced a few frames because at first it was like 8-9 frames and now it's 3 frames of buffer in the game).
The game had one or two big gameplay rebalances per year, plus minor monthly tweaks an fixes, mostly when releaing a new character. To the casual crowd cinematic an specially arcade modes and more single stuff added in Arcade Edition, that edition already had the first input lag improvement and online MP fixes. Arcade Edition was the one highlighted in the 'comeback' results so I think yep, these hings were improved during Season 2 or so.

If Capcom's really learned from SFV's abysmal launch, then they'll make sure the game's got some genuine single-player/casual-orientated content in there Day-1. I'm talking a robust Arcade mode, a relaunch of the Cinematic Story mode, multiple staple and a few new intermission Arcade mode mini-games, a starter art gallery and OST library, ending cinematics etc. They'll make sure the online is working out of the gate.
100% agree and I think they will have with SF6 a way better netcode and amount of single player content and features at launch.

They'll make sure not to dumb down the game mechanics to try luring in more beginners (and instead do what you really need to do for getting them in, much better tutorials and some MP in-game currency/ranking system to incentivize skilled players to coach and help newcomers). They'll make sure features primed for online like Tournament Mode are able to be used as such Day 1, etc.
I think that if they continue with UE they will reuse many game modes like Tournament Mode and will have them or most of them ready at launch. If they got butthurted with input lag and other UE issues they may decide to move to RE engine, which would mean more work to rehash stuff from SFV.

Right, which makes it all the more reason to NOT release PS4 or XBO native versions of the game.
The big majority of the potential customers (casuals or not) will continue on PS4 & XBO, so this is why they make it crossgen: because they will sell more there during the first years.

SF6 is launching in late Year 2/early Year 3 of the current console generation, which is when most of the casuals who go for games like SF based on what the hardcore players of the scene are doing, actually make the transition to the newer consoles.
If it gets released February 2023, it will be as I remember 2 years and 3 months after PS5 release. Same time happened between SFV and PS4 release and SFIV and PS3 release.

Besides, if Capcom's business model for the game really revolves around DLC content sales, it doesn't necessarily matter if they get big sales copies numbers Day 1; they can get consistent modest sales copies numbers months after launch while refreshing interest in the game with new DLC content that most of the players in the install base end up buying.
The more sales the better: if they are making it multiplatform and crossgen, they will expect way better sales than from SFV, both in sales and DLC. In their leaked roadmap document they had a sales estimation for the early months, I don't remember it but can double check it if interested, I saved the file.

That's true, but it only really is an issue if the majority of the more casual types who buy into these types of fighters happen to be casual gamer types as a whole, but I don't think that's actually the case. It's like how someone can be a casual gamer on the whole but be hardcore into Animal Crossing; if they normally wait a few years before buying a new Nintendo system, but a new Animal Crossing comes Day 1, they're likely to just buy the console Day 1 just to play Animal Crossing. Doesn't make the m a hardcore/core gamer necessarily overall, but things like that happen.
There are many reasons that explain why the generational transition this time will be slower:
-Global pandemic so game delays
-Financial crysis so people has to save for longer or wait for price cuts
-Lack of consoles in the stores
-Every generation the games take more work to be developed, which means more people and more time
-GaaS and subscriptions increased engagement, so since people continues engaged feels less need for something new because they continue enjoying the previous console
-Games become more and more expensive, so devs need to find as much as revenue sources as they can, so prefer multiplatform crossgen games
-PS and Xbox continue with the same architecture as is the previous gen, making crossgen games way easier, faster and cheaper than in previous generations

But the very casual/mainstream ones who will stay on PS4/XBO hardware by the time SF6 launches? They honestly don't care and won't play at a high enough level to notice a difference. They'll just to want to play it as a fun game for a little while, won't matter to them if it's native or streamed.
I agree, for casuals is ok to play MK or SF on streaming. The problem is when they play against a hardcore player, who will complain about lag. So I think they won't put SF6 on streaming at least during the first year to make sure they get the best word of mouth possible during the launch window. Considering their bet on SFV, EVO, online tournaments etc I think Sony will want a marketing deal with SF6. And if they sign the same one they did for RE Village, it will mean it won't be on Gamepass for a while.

So why do a native port for them when the majority of fighting game casuals will move over to buy current-gen system at or around the time SF6 releases, anyway?
No, a big majority of the userbase -casual or not- will continue on PS4 by the end of 2022/early 2023 even if PS5 continues breaking gaming history hardware sales records. And a tiny proportion will use streaming a bit less tiny than now. The big majority of their business will mean native PS4 game+dlc sales during the first year or two.

However for Microsoft at least it's almost a guarantee they will decouple xCloud from GamePass Ultimate sometime in the near future;
This won't happen. Streaming is expensive so they will try to monetize their users as much as possible, as it is by charging a bigger fee because of bundling it with more stuff even if people doesn't use it.

even if it's not until later 2022 or sometime 2023, it's likely going to happen. With Sony it's more up-in-the-air but considering their own strategy and most in the SFV install base (particularly those in the FGC) already upgrading from PS4 to PS5, having streaming as an option may not be as much of a priority there.
It won't happen even if Sony magically solves the chips issue (I think it's fair to assume it will continue there at least during the first half of 2023) and seriously destroys by a mile historical console sales records (I think they will keep barely beating PS4 and Switch records due to the chips).

No, this isn't true. As a very general argument to justify why some companies as a whole are still supporting cross-gen natively, yes it has some merit. But in this specific case, I honestly don't think it holds true and gave some reasons as to why above.
Console sales history and the chips shortage crysis say the big majority of the players will continue in the previous gen at the start of 2023.

Maybe we'll see some of that with the Riot games-developed LoL fighter, or some other fighter in the future. But for the bigger franchises (SF, MK, Injustice, Tekken, Smash etc.), they kind of don't have a reason to do that type of larger-scale innovation.
I think the LoL game in terms of gameplay will have a pretty much traditional Street Fighter like combat gameplay. But will highly improve the genre in the part related to the GaaS/userbase count/consideration of player feedback to improve the game/business model/F2P side.

Uh, this might be true in its own case, but doesn't this kind of contradict something you mentioned earlier?

About fighters being affected by latency of streaming? If you're supporting the idea that cross-gen native ports work because the dev can simply lower the resolution and VFX of the game on the older platform, then you have to support the idea of cross-gen streaming as a solution too, because you can do the exact same things with an instance of the game on older systems via cloud streaming!
By streaming speeds I meant streaming from HDD, not xCloud/PS Now. Super fast SSDs open the door to change some game design and level design paradigms for games with big levels because now they won't need to hide streaming/loading times with corridors, elevators, unskippabale cutscenes etc. This will affect other genres in the future, but not SF-like games.

Keep in mind when I say other fighting games "did well" during the supposed 'dark ages' pre-SFIV, I also mean in terms of game quality, or seeing big growth for their respective IP brands in various markets. KOF, GG, VF, DOA, Soul Calibur, MK, Tekken etc. all saw steady sales, increases in IP branding in various territories, and either general increases in quality or a return-to-form (Tekken, MK) during that period.
MK and Tekken had good sales, the other ones never had good sales (let's say over 4-5M or so). Many of them not even 3M.

Across all it's versions SFIV was around roughly 6.5 million LTD. Tekken 6, on only two platforms and only one version release, sold roughly 55% of that figure.
Can't remember how much (you can count it here) but I'd say SFIV series sold around 8M or above. But yes, with more platforms and versions. Tekken always sold more than SF.

MKX outsold SFIV that generation.
Yes, but SFIV is the one who 'revived' the genre in 2008 with a smaller console userbase and a pretty niche genre. MKX instead was released in 2015 with a way bigger console userbase and an enlarged, not that small at all niche genre.

And I'd personally argue that Tekken 3 was a bigger watershed moment for fighters on console (even if less of one overall than SF2 was for its day) than SFIV ended up being for console, though I think we can agree SFIV was a much bigger impact on the FGC/eSports scene than Tekken 3 (partly due to release timing and the technology of the era, TBF).
Tekken 3 sold 8M (best selling Tekken ever) which was insane back then. The best selling Capcom fighting game was SF2 for SNES with 6.3M (even if there are more versions and ports etc).

We have to define what "good sales" are, though, because not every game needs a certain sales number to be financially successful.
I'd say good sales today are 4-5M. Back in the 16-32 bits over 1M, maybe less was good sales. I remembeer SF2 was developed by around 20 people and was developed in some months, less than a year. Capcom had over 20 outsourcing companies working on SFIV and took several years to develop it, and same applies for SFV.

That applies to KOF (which is actually insanely popular in Korea and Latin America, has been for decades), GG, SC, etc. DOA, at least the first two entries, didn't necessarily need SF/Tekken home sales #s because they had arcade revenues to gain and they saved arcade production costs by licensing out the Model 2 from Sega (and in DOA2's case, NAOMI again from Sega).
Show me some receipts showing KOF, GG, SC or DOA having home or arcade sales or revenue close to SF, Tekken or MK because as far as I know their sales have always been way smaller.

I'm not trying to discredit SFIV in all of this, but I do think it's a bit nebulous to say it "started" a 2nd golden age, because that 2nd golden age was already underway prior to its release, with games like Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection, VF5 and Tekken 6. Also depending on what one values out of fighters, we could argue if this current period of fighters is the "best" or not.
A small exercise, spot where the 'dark age' is:
-Tekken 5 (PS2 game) sold 8.2M.
-Tekken 5: Dark Resurrection sold 2.2M, VF5 didn't even sell 2M, Tekken 6 sold 3.5M.
-Tekken 7 sold 7.5M (as of May 2021) and counting.

I don't say they were bad games, I say they reduced their investment on new games because the genre had pretty worse sales during a certain period. And then there was a 2nd period where starting with SFIV they went back to sell well and in many cases better than ever. And well, Tekken and MK always have been the best selling ones, being above the rest.

I mean, in terms of pure game mechanic polish and production budgets it's almost inarguable that it is. However, I personally miss the sheer variety of fighters like had been seen in the '90s. SNK for example had a myriad of fighters from KOF to Real Bout (Fatal Fury) to Last Blade to Samurai Showdown, and nowadays they've basically boiled down to KOF. Capcom had the Darkstalkers series, Rival Schools, Cyberbots, etc., and now they're basically just Street Fighter and maybe a VS game here and there. Not to mention other neat IP like Power Instinct, Breakers, Waku Waku 7, Star Gladiator, Psychic Force, Toshinden, Tobal, Erghiez, Bloody Roar, Fighting Vipers etc. falling to the wayside as the genre contracted partly due to contraction of arcades in the West.
I loved many of these games, but not sure if any of them sold 2M units. And many of them, even 1M.

Yes...from Capcom. But Namco, Sega, SNK, Midway etc. still supported with big releases. I do think the wavering in popularity for other Capcom IP tho like Resident Evil, and that "Project 5" stuff with Nintendo not working out as intended, impacted them in terms of doing another big fighter in the 6th gen, TBF.
As I said, Tekken and MK sell well. Some VF too. SNK, ARC and many other don't, as far as I know. I'd welcome receipts proving me wrong. Capcom did stop making fighting games because their previous fighting games did stop selling so they moved to make other games that did sell well for them, like RE or DMC. You can watch at their Platinum Titles page which ones sold over a million copies.

I'm just saying SFIV wasn't the only fighting game that helped with getting the FGC to grow larger. It might've helped tip it over into a main stride but the FGC was already seeing growth pre-SFIV thanks to earlier 7th-gen fighters taking advantage of online netcode, for example.
I don't say it's the only on who helped to grow the FGC. I say that after a period with poor sales where some companies stopped making fighting game or even dissapeared, SFIV was a big hit and then many others were successful and some even came back. And many of them are performing now better than ever (or almost) in sales, and the genre is a growing trend that started with the SFIV spike.

3S is a very love-hate relationship for me, personally. The fluidity of it is almost unmatched as far as 2D and even a lot of 3D fighters are concerned, but there are some things I actually preferred in 2I like the way that game handles air parries to reset back to neutral, which encouraged a stronger ground game for footsies. 3S parries are also pretty spammable as OSes once you get to a certain level, and the roster balance is fucked. Certain characters like Remy don't even have a reliable cross-up (as in, 99% of the time the one button that can maybe cross-up doesn't actually do it, very VERY contextual that one).

That said, I do prefer it over the SF2 games, it's probably down to timing for me though. I also prefer it and 2I over the Alpha series. 2I IMO has the best background art in the entire series and one of the best overall OSTs (the other ones I would put at that level are SF EX +Alpha and SF EX2). For SF6 I honestly would not mind mash of fully 3D characters (using SFV artstyle but improved) combined with pre-rendered highly detailed 3D stages as multi-layered 2D stages recreating the style of 2I stages in great detail.

Because 2I is the one SF with background stages I feel can actually compete with SNK's from the '90s/early '00s era (SNK I feel have the best background stages of any fighting game maker, in terms of 2D fighters at least).
I love basically all SF games, it's hard for me do decide SF3 series or SF2 series, or inside them to choose a specific chapter. Maybe I'd choose their most recent one because it's the more complete and rebalanced one. Maybe I'd choose World Warrior too because of being the one that started the craziness. Or even if I may prefer SFA2 to SFA3, I spend over thousand hours (maybe around 2000) on SFA3 playing on PS1. I also loved -a bit less- the crossovers, Pocket Fighter, SFEX and the SFIV and SFV series.

Well I think SF3's bigger issue was they literally didn't bring back most of the old cast at all. They didn't even want Ryu and Ken back at first!
Yup
Maybe with a built-in character-specific tagging mechanic, you pick the usual character but they have a dedicated partner who you can tag in to do various techniques with, something like that. Very basic spitballing.
Many people hates changes. If things like removing or changing mechanics like parries or focus attack/back dash etc., I think some may cause riots if they introduce 'strikers'/support characters or make a numbered SF a tag battle game. Or if looking at SF League and the Tokyo Olympics tournament, they turn it into a 3 vs 3 team battle game. I'd welcome all these features specially if optional and the traditional 1 vs 1 matches are available. But haters would gonna hate.
 

yurinka

Member
Jan 19, 2007
14,792
7,043
1,895
Barcelona, Spain
www.capcom-town.es
Wtf are you talking about?




If there will be another Alpha Game it will be Alpha 4 not 3.
In fact after SF Alpha 3 they released Alpha 3 Upper and Alpha 3 Max.

I'd love to have a 2D SF Alpha 4, even if as a 'low effort' it's SF Alpha 3 Max adding modern online features, new endings, all the stages+songs+artwork gallery etc from the SFA series, heavily rebalance the game with a new gameplay feature (without needing to draw new sprites or backgrounds), add some remixed music tracks, some extra color variations of some stages and for the costumes. And maybe I'd include a few characters from other Capcom CPS2 fighting games that would fit.

I'd do the same a couple of years later with SFIII 4th Strike, basically a compilation of everything from the SFIII series, a big rebalance with a new gameplay feature, new endings and colors, and maybe Kenji and Tessa from Red Earth as guest characters.
 

KAL2006

Banned
Feb 6, 2009
12,899
2,984
1,370
UK
Looks like my prediction in the OP is already wrong after that Luke presentation as they hinted at more of Street Fighter news for next year. My prediction was Game Awards this year for Street Fighter VI reveal. So most likely if it's next year then it has to be at the Capcom Cup in February/March.
 

Rat Rage

Member
Aug 13, 2019
1,388
2,257
415
SF6 will not be created on the foundation of your wishes, nor will it be created on the foundation of the developers wishes. The main principle that will determine the whole design process of SF6 will be:

a) monetization
b) microtransactions
c) beginner friendliness (a.k.a fucking lame ass repetitive combo + super combo gameplay). you have to make sure to draw as many players as possible to the game in order to sell as many costumes and dlc characters, season passes and whatnot as possible.