Why is SOUL CALIBUR II so popular?

[quote name='Mookyjooky'][quote name='games2003']Yes SC2 was way too overhyped and didnt capture that magic that SC1 has and still has. SC2's engine isnt fluid & overall I was pretty disappointed sure am happy I bought VF4 Evolution instead!

Not enough gamers appreciate VF4 which is the best overall fighter on the market currently. Plus anytime a fighting game goes multiplatform for the GC PS@ or xbox it always stinks, remember MK's lackluster return.

Best Fighters Period:

*VF4 Evolution or VF4*
Guilty gear x2
Street Fighter 2
Soul Calibur 1
Samurai Showdown 2
Tekken 3
MK2 & 3
DOA3
Marvel 2
Capcom vs SNK 2

Help me out if I forgot anything else worthy?[/quote]

Even though you are a Noob...I agree with everything you said...except...Mortal Kombat 2 was Ok at best and 3 was horrible. Aldo DOA2 was a cleaner and better fighting engine than 3...but I love the added characters...so I dont know about that one.

Oya...and you missed

Street Fighter 3 : Third Strike
Red Earth / Warzard[/quote]

I think the whole reason Soul Cal gets lots of acclaim and hype is that out of all the games you have on that list, only the Soul Calibur games can be picked up and played by anyone. (well, i don't know why the hell D)A3 is on there) The thing is, you don't have every move at your disposal, and once you learn the game, you understand the little discrepancies which allow to make you the best possible fighter. Basically, Soul Cal forces you to learn characters as does every other fighter, but it gives you satisfaction because some of the most basic moves are also some of the most fun to watch.
 
I bought sc2 nd was also fairly dissapointed. I don't think i'll ever like another fighter as much as the two that are my current favs, smash bros meele and capcom vs snk 2. soul calibur didn't seem all that balanced and it did seem alot like a button masher, I could just ruin everything with voldo, ai and player alike.
 
Okay, I'll weigh in on this one. First point, just because you don't like a game, does not make it a bad game, or unworthy of acclaim. I happen to not like GTA3, and have little to no fun playing it, but that in no way takes away from the fact that it is a very popular, innovative game. Second point, just because the AI beats you with a strategy employed by the top tier players (parrying the initial attack), doesn't make the game cheap, you just have to adjust and counter that strategy (Note, immediately parrying after an attack of yours is parried will succeed some 90% of the time). Third point, you don't need to know every last attack to be able to parry. Parry has two moves, one for high/mid attacks, and one for low.

As far as the 2d vs 3d depth (Word games aside) I think it's about an even split at the higher levels. While 3d games have the element of depth and often have larger movesets for each character, 2d games have added depth in the form of multi-level super atacks, guard cancels, roman cancels(GGXX), etc. I would say that 3d fighters have more accessible depth than 2d fighters, and that 2d fighters require a deeper technical understanding.

Fourth point, if you're blocking and parrying, you aren't a button masher. Button mashers can be more successful against mid-level players in SCII, but will still get their hats handed to them by a higher level player (every time, not 3 out of 4 as was previously posted).


All that said, you don't have to like the game. It may very well not be your cup of tea.
 
[quote name='Mookyjooky']I feel that thought Soulcalibur 2 was a great game....it wasnt as good as the first.[/quote]
I agree.
[quote name='SpookyD']I bought sc2 nd was also fairly dissapointed. I don't think i'll ever like another fighter as much as the two that are my current favs, smash bros meele and capcom vs snk 2. soul calibur didn't seem all that balanced and it did seem alot like a button masher, I could just ruin everything with voldo, ai and player alike.[/quote]
Smash and Capcom vs. SNK 2 are awesome, but I don't see how either of those games are more balanced than Soul Calibur 2. I have MUCH more trouble beating an experienced friend with pichu or bowser than beating an experienced friend with let's say...yunsung. I can't say the same for capcom vs. snk, since I can't play with all the characters, but it still doesn't seem as balanced. Also, Soul Calibur's only a button masher to a certain level. Button mashers could beat me when I was just learning, but now, they never do.
[quote name='abrannan']Second point, just because the AI beats you with a strategy employed by the top tier players (parrying the initial attack), doesn't make the game cheap, you just have to adjust and counter that strategy (Note, immediately parrying after an attack of yours is parried will succeed some 90% of the time). Third point, you don't need to know every last attack to be able to parry. Parry has two moves, one for high/mid attacks, and one for low.[/quote]
But the AI does it unreasonably when it's set at its highest level. I like to not consider AI a part of the game. I only see soul calibur 2 as a 2 player game. Also, the low parry parries low AND middle. middle attacks are parried by either.
[quote name='abrannan']Fourth point, if you're blocking and parrying, you aren't a button masher. Button mashers can be more successful against mid-level players in SCII, but will still get their hats handed to them by a higher level player (every time, not 3 out of 4 as was previously posted).[/quote]
True. Sorry about my previous post.
 
I think Soul Caliber II is one of the best 3-D fighters ever, if not the best. I thought SC on DC was good, but I thought SCII was better. The only other fighters I might like more than SCII, as far as 3-D fighters are concerned, is Tekken or Tech Romancer.

I think DOA3 is very overrated.
 
I actually like the game more now than when I first played it
( day of Release ). I have it for both GCN & Xbox.
 
SC1 was BMer friendly, SC2 actually tweaked so BMers had les of an advantage.

I hate it when nostagia clouds the mind... SC2 is in every single way improved over the original. Whether it was better or not is left to your own opinion.
 
I've got the GCN version. Bought it at $50. Not worth that IMO. Worth 20 bucks for an exclusive fighter and decent overall fighter.
 
It's fun IMO, cause anyone can get into it. I've had friends over who wouldn't normally touch a controller in their life BUT when they get to mash a few buttons as Kilik they pull off some extravagent and even have a chance at winning. Games are suppose to be about fun.. I think this game covers that....
 
I understand why it's popular, cause it got hyped a whole bunch from Magizines to EB. It came out and I decided to wait till I could find it cheaper than $20. Of course it went greatest hits and now I laugh at any who spent more then $30 for Soul Caliber 1.5 ....I mean Soul Caliber 2.
 
[quote name='Rodimus Donut']I understand why it's popular, cause it got hyped a whole bunch from Magizines to EB. It came out and I decided to wait till I could find it cheaper than $20. Of course it went greatest hits and now I laugh at any who spent more then $30 for Soul Caliber 1.5 ....I mean Soul Caliber 2.[/quote]

I do not feel bad about spending 50 on it. Then again I had never played SC or Soul Edge before
 
[quote name='Rodimus Donut']I understand why it's popular, cause it got hyped a whole bunch from Magizines to EB. It came out and I decided to wait till I could find it cheaper than $20. Of course it went greatest hits and now I laugh at any who spent more then $30 for Soul Caliber 1.5 ....I mean Soul Caliber 2.[/quote]

I dropped $50 the day it came out and have never even begun to regret it. I feel sorry for those who just can't accept that maybe instead of SC2 being "crap", that there nostigiac memories just don't hold up as well.

Is it just a bigger expanded version of SC1? Yes. Does it make it worse? Only if you can't think.
 
[quote name='"-Never4ever-"'][quote name='Rodimus Donut']quote]

I dropped $50 the day it came out and have never even begun to regret it. I feel sorry for those who just can't accept that maybe instead of SC2 being "crap", that there nostigiac memories just don't hold up as well.

Is it just a bigger expanded version of SC1? Yes. Does it make it worse? Only if you can't think.[/quote]

I never said I didn't like it or it was "crap", just not worth $50. I did want a copy, and I did buy one. I just paid $35 less than you cause I could wait.
 
The only thing this game needed was an offline (or online) version of the Conquest thing from the arcades, as well as stat tracking for offline multiplayer. I'd probably still be playing it regularly if it wasn't for that.

VF4:Evo got it right with the ranking system, but it's a little too inaccessible for people that don't take the time to learn it, or don't have the game. SC2 was much more accessible, but was missing the desire to play over and over and over again.
 
[quote name='ykryptonite13']Ahh just play Street Fighter and KOF.[/quote]

Spoken like a true warrior, I couldn't agree more.
 
Jeez, what's with all the hating?

First off, the complaint that it's not different enough from its predecessor can be leveled at every other fighting game out there. Change the engine slightly, add another character or two, and send it out. Virtua Fighter and DOA are just as guilty of this.

Also, complaining about the AI is pointless. Once you've unlocked everything, there are only two modes you should ever use in a fighting game: Practice and Vs. -- moaning about the AI in SC (or any fighting game for that matter) is like knocking Disgaea for graphics: it just misses the point.

I don't know -- what else was everyone complaining about?

In the end, it makes me wish that there was some kind of "videogame appreciation" class that developers and journalists taught. I see a topic like this and I'm reminded of the guy in high school who one day chimed in with the classic "I think 'The Old Man in the Sea' is overrated: it's just about some old dude fishing."
 
[quote name='trq']Jeez, what's with all the hating?

First off, the complaint that it's not different enough from its predecessor can be leveled at every other fighting game out there. Change the engine slightly, add another character or two, and send it out. Virtua Fighter and DOA are just as guilty of this.

Also, complaining about the AI is pointless. Once you've unlocked everything, there are only two modes you should ever use in a fighting game: Practice and Vs. -- moaning about the AI in SC (or any fighting game for that matter) is like knocking Disgaea for graphics: it just misses the point.

I don't know -- what else was everyone complaining about?

In the end, it makes me wish that there was some kind of "videogame appreciation" class that developers and journalists taught. I see a topic like this and I'm reminded of the guy in high school who one day chimed in with the classic "I think 'The Old Man in the Sea' is overrated: it's just about some old dude fishing."[/quote]

To say that VF4 was not different and much better than the previous versions is a lie!
 
My favorite fighting games are KOF and Tekken. And every video game magizine, and dumb EB employee, rips on them for not changing much from the previous one. But when Soul Caliber 2 comes out, I guess that's a diffrent story. They never mention the fact that there are only 4 new characters, and my favorite character in it "Cervantes" didn't get anything new except a lousy grab.

Don't get me wrong I like SCII. But just because it got so much hype and everyone was praising it for being the "fighting game to beat" it pissed me off and decided to just play my Gulity Gear X2 and KOF 2002 more.
 
I agree with the OP. I'm a fighting game gamer and I was hugely dissapointed with SC 2. I remember I loved SC on the dreamcast but when part 2 came out I felt cheated. All this hype and nothing really spectacular. Even considering the potential graphic power of systems now and considering how good SC 1 looked as a first gen DC game made me feel cheated. I gurantee that if they didn't have a version with Link in it (which I still haven't played) the game would have got 1/4th the attention it got in the end. I think what made the first one so good was because there wasn't so many good 3d fighters at the time. the 3d fighter that raised the standard for me was VF 4 and Evolution came out very close to SC 2 and I found VF Evoultion to be a way superior game.
 
[quote name='CaseyRyback'][quote name='trq']Jeez, what's with all the hating?

First off, the complaint that it's not different enough from its predecessor can be leveled at every other fighting game out there. Change the engine slightly, add another character or two, and send it out. Virtua Fighter and DOA are just as guilty of this.

Also, complaining about the AI is pointless. Once you've unlocked everything, there are only two modes you should ever use in a fighting game: Practice and Vs. -- moaning about the AI in SC (or any fighting game for that matter) is like knocking Disgaea for graphics: it just misses the point.

I don't know -- what else was everyone complaining about?

In the end, it makes me wish that there was some kind of "videogame appreciation" class that developers and journalists taught. I see a topic like this and I'm reminded of the guy in high school who one day chimed in with the classic "I think 'The Old Man in the Sea' is overrated: it's just about some old dude fishing."[/quote]

To say that VF4 was not different and much better than the previous versions is a lie![/quote]

Seriously. VF 3 compared to VF 4 is like comparing Chili to Cereal. The only thing those two have in common is that you eat them in a bowl. That's basically VF 3 to VF 4. They just share the same name and chracters.
 
[quote name='Rodimus Donut']My favorite fighting games are KOF and Tekken. And every video game magizine, and dumb EB employee, rips on them for not changing much from the previous one. But when Soul Caliber 2 comes out, I guess that's a diffrent story. They never mention the fact that there are only 4 new characters, and my favorite character in it "Cervantes" didn't get anything new except a lousy grab.[/quote]

No, you're totally right. Fighting games in general have a bad rep for not adding much with new editions, but that's because the "small" additions don't seem like much to many reviewers and casual players, even though they often alter how the game is fundamentally played. People buy sports games that add little more than roster updates each year -- what's wrong with fighting games doing the same?

To use games you're familiar with, consider Tekken 3 -- it took its share of "Tekken 2.5" criticism, but think about how a seemingly minor element like sidestepping changed how the game was played. Or the change in KOF from the striker system to tagging your partners in and out in 2002. (2003?) Seems minor ... unless you really know the game.

Anyway, I can assure you that SC II took its share of flak for not changing up much -- both IGN and EGM pointed it out in their reviews. The only reason it may not seem like it is because many reviewers assumed most people never got the chance to play the first game (which is pretty accurate).

Oh, and technically SC II has 6 new characters: Talim, Raphael, Necrid, and the console specific one are obvious, but Cassandra and Yun Sun fight NOTHING like their Sophitia or Assassin/Hwang.
 
[quote name='emceelokey']Seriously. VF 3 compared to VF 4 is like comparing Chili to Cereal. The only thing those two have in common is that you eat them in a bowl. That's basically VF 3 to VF 4. They just share the same name and chracters.[/quote]

Well, I was kinda making a point. Yes, you know that the games are fairly different ... but that's because you know the games well. See my above post: pretty much all fighting games get flack for not changing much, but usually it's just not true. It's just that the average reviewer/gamer doesn't see the removal of an "Evade" button as any more significant than the overhauling of, say, Soul Calibur's weapon-stripping or guard-impact system. If you don't know the game, you won't appreciate it, or even notice it. Thus it's kinda hypocritical to give any one game a hard time for it. I wouldn't be right in giving VF 4 a hard time for only adding 2 new characters any more than someone else would be right for giving SCII flak for doing the same.

Now, if you want to have a SC II vs. VF 4 EVO debate, I'm down for that, too, but that's really a different thread... 8)
 
[quote name='trq']Anyway, I can assure you that SC II took its share of flak for not changing up much -- both IGN and EGM pointed it out in their reviews. The only reason it may not seem like it is because many reviewers assumed most people never got the chance to play the first game (which is pretty accurate).

Oh, and technically SC II has 6 new characters: Talim, Raphael, Necrid, and the console specific one are obvious, but Cassandra and Yun Sun fight NOTHING like their Sophitia or Assassin/Hwang.[/quote]

What you said was all nice but SCII still got great reviews for being what felt like a minor update to the series, while other great games get burned for it. So I don't think it got enough "flak" for not changing up.

I'm sorry I should have noted that eairlier I was recalling my first experience with SCII in the aracdes where it didn't have console specific character or Necrid. But even so I say 5 new chacters cause I don't count Necrid as an original design. He just steals everyones moves with a couple of his own.
 
Actually I think most of the reviews I read said that it hadn't really changed much and noted that. The marks were still high because the original was so exceptional and the second one honed it to near perfection. Still they did note it wasn't a huge leap, if I recall correctly.

Hell I just want SC3 and VF 5 now with online capability. Even if they are the same damn game, that'd be fine with me.
 
[quote name='evilpenguin9000']Hell I just want SC3 and VF 5 now with online capability. Even if they are the same damn game, that'd be fine with me.[/quote]
That'd be awesome. None of my friends are good enough at SC2 to provide a challenge, and the nearest arcade doesn't have SC2 there. Having it online give me challenges and improve me a lot.
 
[quote name='Rodimus Donut']But even so I say 5 new chacters cause I don't count Necrid as an original design. He just steals everyones moves with a couple of his own.[/quote]

I would disagree with that statement. Necrid is very much an original character design, whereas Charade is not. Charade takes an entire moveset from another character, Necrid takes individual moves. In a combo-based system, where moves flow from one to the next, having a different selection of individual moves is significant. Also, character size matters, so even though both Necrid and Ivy may share a move, it's different when Necrid uses it due to his reach.

But that doesn't change the fact that Necrid isn't a very interesting character, to me anyway.
 
I too am not a Necrid fan. I just never seemed to be able to work out how to get his moves to flow. They are disjointed. It didin't seem to be worth the effort.
 
The game is an easy playthrough - I got stuck once at a dock somewhere, but beat it after getting pissed off enough to learn new moves. The AI is pretty simple and straightforward, and it was fun for it's part. I got kicked around playing my friends though, and saw there was much more that I needed to learn to be good at it. I've since abandoned the game to a friend who likes those games. I give it kudos for keeping my interest when I don't even like fighting games.
 
[quote name='"Rodimus Donut"'][quote name='-Never4ever-'][quote name='Rodimus Donut']quote]

I dropped $50 the day it came out and have never even begun to regret it. I feel sorry for those who just can't accept that maybe instead of SC2 being "crap", that there nostigiac memories just don't hold up as well.

Is it just a bigger expanded version of SC1? Yes. Does it make it worse? Only if you can't think.[/quote]

I never said I didn't like it or it was "crap", just not worth $50. I did want a copy, and I did buy one. I just paid $35 less than you cause I could wait.[/quote]

Well that all wasn't directed just at you, itwas a basic summarry against all the various complaints thrown at SC2. You paid $15 cause that's what the game was worth to you you, I paid $50 cause that's how much it was worth to me. It's all a matter of personal taste, I am a fighting game fanatic. I might suck at them, but I'm addicted to them none-the-less. I have to have them, but I'll only drop $50 if it's really worth it and to me SC2 was worth it and then some.
 
quote]

Well that all wasn't directed just at you, itwas a basic summarry against all the various complaints thrown at SC2. You paid $15 cause that's what the game was worth to you you, I paid $50 cause that's how much it was worth to me. It's all a matter of personal taste, I am a fighting game fanatic. I might suck at them, but I'm addicted to them none-the-less. I have to have them, but I'll only drop $50 if it's really worth it and to me SC2 was worth it and then some.[/quote]

Don't get me wrong either, I love fighting games too. You should just see my Dreamcast and Sega Saturn collection of fighting games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top