So...SF3 was considered a failure...what are some reasons that might be so?

I don’t think OP was talking about Third Stirke, just the 3 series in general. And yes the first SF3 - NG was a “failure” mostly due to not many familiar faces, and all the other games out at the time, I don’t remember many people playing NG. If we’re talking about Third Strike, that started as a “failure” too, it wasn’t very popular and wasn’t even in the first Evo (just a 5v5 exhibition). It didn’t start to turn around in the US popularity wise until late in the game due to things like the Daigo parry and JPN match vids. It went from not even being an official game, to being the biggest draw, so I’d say it turned around nicely for those that like 3s.

I think that may have been part of the problem. They had serious stories but if you didn’t know about that, they looked to be a bunch of freaks.

Although personally, I still think it was a combination of that, a saturated market and Capcom not promoting it well. While I knew about the game when it came out, I admit to ignoring it mostly since everyone was playing the Versus games in the arcades where I used to go to (there’d be 1 or 2 SFIII or 2I machines, but you’d barely find anyone playing on them).

3s = best fighter ever made

To me it failed cause Capcom introduced the CPS3 which arcade operators didn’t want to switch to so most grabbed the Vs or Alpha game cause it was running on CPS2. When it went to console, DC was the only one that wanted it. Playstation 2 has severely frowned upon 2D gaming in general unless it’s in a compilation pack, so DC was the only system that could handle it and it was dying. By the time the whole fiasco was over with it made SF3 look like a failure.

I think by failed he meant at an economic standpoint.

I wouldn’t call SF3 a failure, unless you believe it was meant to repeat the insane success that SF2 had. Personally, I don’t believe Capcom had those expectations at the time, considering how saturated the market was with Street Fighter related games and fighting games in general.

The original SF2 was released in a time when FG didn’t really exist. SF3 was released at a time when the genre was at its most saturated.
Yeah, SF3 came no where near SF2 in terms of popularity…but, I don’t think Capcom expected it to. It COULDN’T have.

SF3’s lack of widespread commercial success was also a result of its availability. It wasn’t released on a system that anybody really owned at the time.

I love Dreamcast to death, but it was no PS1.

SFA3 sold 1 million on PS1. But, on DC it sold numbers comparable to what the SF3 series sold. It makes sense to infer that if SF3 were released on PS1, too, it would have sold much more. Maybe not a million, but a lot more.

Unfortunately, a PS1 version would have been really crappy, because SF3 was a graphically intense sprite based game. PS1 isn’t known for it’s awesome 2D sprite based arcade conversions. Perhaps this is why Capcom was hesitant to put the gloriously animated masterpiece on a system that couldn’t do it justice.

This whole “the cast was filled with freaks” BS is BS.

The main reason the game didn’t sell was because it had no place to sell itself. The environment simply wasn’t there.

The SF3 series was indeed a failure. It was the failure of the SF3 series that caused Capcom to not only abandom SF for ten years, but convinced them to never ever make a hand-drawn 2D fighter from scratch again (the only game that came out post NG that consisted of entirely new sprites was Jojo, which was already in development).

As to why the series failed, there are a number of reasons, not all of which are the fault of the game itself:

  • Expensive hardware: CPSIII was expensive compared to the ubiquitous CPSII, and thus had poorer distribution.

  • Too expensive to make: The results look great, but the game’s excessively over-animated sprites meant it took forever to create them, resulting in smaller casts at a time when games were regularly boasting 20+ character casts. Don’t forget that NG shipped with 12 characters (one unplayable boss), with 5 of those characters sharing two bodies (Ryu/Ken/Sean and Yun/Yang, and even Y/Y was really just one character), and 2I added two more head swaps (Akuma and Urien).

  • Released at the wrong time: 3D games were starting to take off. Virtua Fighter 3 made everything else look like garbage and Tekken 3 was the hotness. These were the games that captured the interest of the casual market. By the time NG released, its visuals were only appreciated by the hardcore 2D fans while casuals looked at it and though “OLD”.

  • Not enough hype: There was some pre-release hype, but it seems after the game actually came out, Capcom dropped the ball. I think they really did expect SF3 to continue where SF2 left off. They were hilariously wrong. Gotta love their initial hubris though: They wanted to name the game “THREE”, which actually did appear on a few arcade marquees, though never in the game itself.

  • No timely console version on a console anyone cared about: SF3 didn’t get a console version until the Dreamcast port of NG and 2I in late 1999, which was after the arcade version of Third Strike had come out. DC 3S came out right before the PS2 dropped, which pretty much meant that almost no one actually bought these games.

  • Not enough old characters: A lot of the players who actually saw SF3 saw a game that wasn’t even recognizable as SF aside from Ken and Ryu. Capcom really fucked themselves over by ditching the majority of the cast, all of whom had become some of the most recognizable video game characters ever. And for idiots who want to claim “they did it with SF2”, please kill yourselves for your thundering stupidity. No one cared when they ditched SF1’s cast for SF2 because no one cared about SF1. That didn’t apply to SF2, so this was a case of Capcom shooting themselves in the foot unnecessarily. The Sf3 series also had a disproportionate number of freaks, which also turned players off. People may think Urien is awesome now, but people thought he was a joke in his first year of existence, a headswap of Gill (also a joke) with an awful name (his nickname was URINE). Hugo was HUGEASS, etc, etc.

  • New system too difficult for new players: This is hilarious, because I’m 100% certain this was not Capcom’s intention. In every aspect except for the parry system, SF3 was clearly trying to cater to the scrub whining of that era: Throws sucked, projectiles sucked, zoning was weak, super-cancelling made for easy damage, and everyone wanted to get in close and do random mixups. But the main mechanic of the game - parrying - proved to be too difficult for most players to make good use out of, which made lopsided matches between good players and weaker ones even more lopsided than they could have been, turning off all but the most hardcore of players. SF3 developed its own fanbase of such players, since most of the OG SF crowd didn’t like it, either sticking with the Alpha games and/or migrating to Marvel/Vs. games.

Most of the SF3’s failure stems from the first iteration, New Generation, which stumbled out the gate. 2I and 3S were meant to salvage the project, and AFAIK the whole projectile ultimately broke even, but it took years (5+) to do so. Which wasn’t good enough for Capcom’s beancounters, so they put SF on the backburner for years as a result.

Nobody thought it was a failure outside SRK.

And SRK doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

I beg the differ sir. Up until recently with Lets Play Arcade letting the 3S machine go to shit we had 3S to play for the last 2-3 years, arcade version that is and in decent to good condition. 3S in our area though is very dead everybody has moved on to the newer games.

-DJ-

Interesting perspective…although I would consider parrying pretty easy as well, at least execution-wise. The difficulty about using it properly is actually a mental thing. Some of what you said is kinda exaggerated…like throws sucking, lol. They may not be as dumb as ST, but they are still good. Everyone is sorta considered a mini-grappler in 3s.

it sold poorly because the home ports weren’t until 3 years later. Arcades were dying already in 1997 also.

Um dont believe what people tell you. Third Strike is past amazing on so many levels. I know when you watch a match vid you have to be amazed at what going on. I think alot of people are turned off by the difficulty and just call it a bad game. Its the furthest from that and that why it has such a dedicated scene 11 years later. If you dont understand the game that a lame reason to bad mouth it. Wants you give the game a chance I promise you be amazed at its flexibility. Know game feels as organic as Third Strike.

no one is arguing against i being a great game, the OP is talking about sales wise. and sales wise, it was a failure until it was released on ps2/xbox

Ultima, you’ll have to elaborate on some things, bro

Wut

Still faster than a jab and hard enough to tech on reaction, unless you mean to tell me not taking damage for teching is enough to make them “suck”. Throwing is a massive part of a lot of characters’ gameplay, and the fact there’s so many option selects involving teching throws is a testament to their “threat”

Yup

Here comes the “there’s no zoning because you can just parry!!1” theory fighting brigade. It is indeed weaker than in other SF titles, but hardly “weak”

What do you mean “easy damage”? How is, I don’t know, Alpha sweep into super all that different from sweep into fireball into super? If you consider the scaling, how is it even “easy damage”, considering they add so little to (and depending on the BnB, even subtract from) the final damage output? There’s an extra instant to hit-confirm your super I guess, but how does that even translate to “easy damage”?

What is a “random mixup”? If it’s not intentional then it’s not a mixup

i’ll be honest. i played more alpha 2 then sf3 when it was in the arcades, but only because it was simpler to learn imo. i still played sf3, but it was 50 cents, and as a kid i couldnt afford to play it that much. the times i did play it i really enjoyed it, but once that one ibuki player joined in i hated the fuckin game. (this was for new gen. and 2nd impact btw). 3s was doing alright in the arcade, but yea, the dying arcade scene pretty much put a stop to this game getting more play/exposure. the arcade got it around 98/99, and sometime in late 2000/early 2001 the arcade was closed.

financially, yes it was a failure here.

God I’m glad SOMEBODY said it. People act like you gotta play like a fucking robot to be considered good and that these so called “Random mixups” or “Random attack style” or even “patternless randoms”(yeah I’ve heard that said too) is somehow scrubby…even though from what I’ve seen it often leads to victory.

So I’m guessing he’s basically trying to say that if someone wants to get in close, they needed to be unpredictable, stupid game.

Are you that dense or could you really not comprehend he was referring to NG, not 3s?

You must have misunderstood what I was trying to say, I’m just asking Ultima how can you get in close and do “random mixups”. If you’re mixing someone up, be it 50/50 or else, it’s intentional, not random. And it’s in every fighter I can think of

Throws being able to land on people blocking are conductive to “getting in your face” to do mixups, and so are are overheads being able to land on crouching opponents, sweeps on standing opponents, etc. etc. FG systems usually expect you to “mix up” in order to deal damage

But a “random mixup”? What the hell

That’s “button mashing” to me

People sure caught feelings quickly in this thread. Yall need father figures in your lives.

That wouldn’t make any of what I said wrong. Especially since parrying was even more lenient in NG, retard.