Since Seth is so respected around these parts (deservedly, I might add) I thought I’d investigate what he might have to say about the present day scene were he not a Capcom mouthpiece. I found a number of quotes that seem eerily applicable to the current scene and one extremely popular game in particular!
“Here’s a simpler idea: throw all this garbage [system gimmicks] out. Ask yourself a simple question: What existing problem in previous SFs were these “innovations” designed to solve? The answer: None. They were just thrown in to the engine willy-nilly to attract new players, in the hopes that we’d find them “real cool”. In large part, this has worked. It has attracted new players, although it has done so at the clear expense of gameplay. If anything was wrong with ST, it was precisely throw-softening (not a huge deal), and supers.” - 1998 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/browse_thread/thread/3fb6209ee6e9cd22/a9b699158b22ed3f)
“The problem as I see it is that the SF2 engine does not (gameplay-wise) demand any of the new SFA additions. They are put in to attract new players as newfangled “features”. In theory, I have no problem with that. In practice, it happens to suck.” - 1996 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/19dc75c5c1136c30)
“Throw softening was an example of … trying to cater to the scrubs.” 1998 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/browse_thread/thread/3fb6209ee6e9cd22/a9b699158b22ed3f)
“[In XvSF] attackers stun is often longer than the blocker, which is one of the more ridiculous turns of events in SF games ever.” - 1996 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/8a1e923cb4e841ac)
“I agree [reversal DPs getting stuffed is] stupid.” - 1998 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/8497bbdb9ff0a155)
On the state of the scene
[In response to the claim that Capcom can only achieve ST’s greatness again by appealing to novices] “This is just false. Achieving greatness does not mean appealing to everyone in videogames any more than it means appealing to everyone in any other area. Not everyone who plays videogames is a good judge of what is or is not a good game.” - 1998 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/browse_thread/thread/3fb6209ee6e9cd22/a9b699158b22ed3f)
“No one is confused about the economic factors influencing Capcoms decisions. But they are making weak games.” - 1996 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/19dc75c5c1136c30)
“I’m sure [Capcom] think[s] they are catering to expert players. I’ve decided it’s just naive to think that Capcom would or does have any interest in producing a seriously great game” - 1998 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/8497bbdb9ff0a155)
“Do you constantly go out and try new foods, or do you find yourself eating some of your favorites most of the time? Is chess a worse game than some newer game on the grounds that it is extremely old? A good game is a good game, no matter how old. A bad game is bad, no matter how new.” 1996 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/19dc75c5c1136c30)
“If [your objective] is to make the best possible SF game, then catering to novices is obviously going to get in your way.” - 1998 (http://groups.google.com/group/alt.games.sf2/msg/a9b699158b22ed3f)
AGSF2 is a goldmine!