Talk:Super Street Fighter II

Street Fighter II

This article says that Super Street Fighter II Turbo Revival is the most recent canoncal Street Fighter II. But what about Hyper Street Fighter II? That game was only released with the Anniversary Collection, which came out in 2004. So is Hyper Street Fighter II the most recent canon?

Goof up in "SSF2T Revival"?

Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo Revival seems to have a little goof-up. In this game Bison's victory-boast is "Only handsome warriors win fights" instead of the better known "Anyone who opposes me shall be destroyed". Is this in deed a goof (Bison is Vega in Japan) or an intentional in-joke and should it be mentioned here?

it was indeed, a goof70.23.143.254 05:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yep it's a goof. They changed the names round (As expected for over here) but the quotes went to the wrong characters along with the names. MightyKombat 12:46, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Infobox

Due to this game coming out with multiple names, listing all the releases in the infobox is a bit tricky. Let me know if I made any mistakes or if it could be made to look better. MrLeo 00:56, 25 March 2006 (UTC)

Needs major cleanup

I did some major editing of this article, but it needs a lot more work. There's a large amount of duplicated information that should be cleaned out. It looks as though the list versions were there first, but I know full prose is preferred here. I'm not sure which version to remove, but a game like this (where the Turbo version is STILL played competitively today) deserves something a little cleaner. -Jacquismo 22:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Taglines

I removed most of the taglines added by David Pro. Although adding taglines from promo materials for a video game is somewhat interesting, I don't think we need everything that's been advertised. It just ends up cluttering up the article. I left the two major ones that actually appeal to the audience (not to arcade operators) and are somewhat memorable. I'm a little uncomfortable with a random tagline section at the beginning of the article, but I have no suggestions for a better place for them. -Jacquismo 00:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

• I don't see the reason for taglines at all. I removed them. JuJube 00:57, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I think that the article should be have a taglines section, but in which part can add them David Pro 15:01, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Tier List

Is the recently-added tier list needed? Sourced or not I remember reading that Wikipedia is not a games guide MightyKombat 12:47, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Introduction of Akuma Section

"If you lose to Akuma and continue, you will fight Bison instead.". Can't speak for other versions, but on the 3D0, if you lost to Akuma, you kept fighting him next time. I remember losing to him like 100 times in a row until I beat him the first time I reached him with Ryu. If you beat Akuma the first time you fought him, you got a different ending sequence though- one with images of all the characters' faces beaten up. I can't really remember because it was a while ago but I think to get that you had to actually be playing through the game as Akuma. Anyway I know that if you clear the game beating everyone without using a continue you got an extra credits sequence. Ben 2082 (talk) 21:50, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

To back up this claim, I admit I tried the game on MAME. The only time you get to fight Bison instead is when another player interviens in the Akuma/Gouki fight. --Another user

Home soundtracks information

Didn't this article had information on which soundtrack was which for the home ports like the 3DO (which was the FM Towns soundtrack with extras) and the DOS versions? Like wasn't the wikipedia article the one that mentions that the DOS CD version of Super Turbo has a soundtrack from another port? Or am I mistaking it for Youtube comments? Whatever the case, I like to suggest some specifics on the home soundtrack versions.

WP:VG Assessment

An absolute requirement for B-class is at least some footnotes to references. This article has none, and therefore it will remain Start-class. Other comments below.

• The grammar in the second paragraph of the lead and the first sentence of the Gameplay section is weird.
• The "changes" section focuses only on what changed. It is usual to describe the game itself, and then compare the largest improvements afterwards, rather than just listing the improvements. The latter requires someone to be familiar with the previous game, which the average reader won't be.

User:Krator (t c) 19:05, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Fixed the grammar a bit. The problem is that Super Street Fighter II in its core is just Street Fighter II with additional features and refinements, rather than an entirely new game. Even after fixing the article up and cleaning it, I still think its a merge candidate. Jonny2x4 (talk) 23:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Enhanced speed and difficulty

I'm replacing "enhanced speed and difficulty" with "four speed settings plus new moves and animations for all the existing characters" because: 1. The latter is true. 2. The former is basically bragging about how hard the game is. I hate when people do that, because it makes the rest of us look inferior. I don't want to condemn the game because of this, I am trying to get better at it. But I don't like people bragging about the difficulty, so I'm replacing the line.

24.247.134.174 (talk) 19:49, 6 July 2009 (UTC)WarMasterXX

UPDATE: I just noticed the new line "The game is also noticeable for its extremely high difficulty level in one-player mode." I'm comfortable with this line because at least it's not explicitly bragging about the difficulty. 66.227.220.139 (talk) 22:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)WarMasterXX

Ranked 10 in the top 100 nintendo video gamees of all time

http://www.officialnintendomagazine.co.uk/article.php?id=7327

This game needs a reception section. Sincerely Subzerosmokerain (talk) 19:40, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed split

• Against - The article's size is fine. There's no point in splitting it and generating two smallish articles. --uKER (talk) 17:46, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
• Against - Really no point. Not much more can be said that has already been said in the two articles that are already existent. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 21:07, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
• I was the one who made the proposal. They're both very smallish right now because a lot of content had to be cut out back when Wikipedia only article up to a certain size. Even now, the Super Turbo section alone is expanded enough to warrant a separate article. You have to be really naive to think that Super and Super Turbo are identical just because they have the same graphics and character. Plus, I want to add specific information about the home console releases from the Japanese Wikipedia article. Jonny2x4 (talk) 22:32, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
  • No one said anything about Super and ST being identical. I just don't think much more can be said that what is already written in the Super article. But if there really is much more that can be written, then I'll reconsider. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 23:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
    • The Japanese language Street Fighter II article has plenty of information about both, the original arcade releases and the home/mobile versions. While everything is in one article on the Japanese Wikipedia, I think translating all the info to the English site might bloat the article a bit. Jonny2x4 (talk) 23:23, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
      • Add the information you consider relevant, and if the article ever reaches a size that merits it being split, it can be considered. Right now, there's no point. --uKER (talk) 03:57, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
• I made a bold edit and moved all the "Super Turbo"-specific content to its own article. Feel free to argue against this move, but you have to admit it's a lot less confusing now. Jonny2x4 (talk) 20:51, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

Reception, EGM

I noticed this article talked about EGM's rankings of the previous Street Fighter 2 titles but not Super. I remember there was actually a pretty significant negative editorial in EGM concerning Capcom's port of Super to the SNES and Genesis. The main issue was that this port came shortly after turbo, did not add enough to warrant a sequel, and removed features that were available in turbo that would presumably be added shortly when ST got ported to the consoles. As far as I remember, it was one of the first, probably the first, media outcries against Capcom's release strategy.

Unfortunately I can't remember the issue and I don't have it available to cite the editorial either. Thought maybe someone else would have an old copy though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.160.209.204 (talk) 19:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

A shame that you don't have an old copy. But thanks for pointing out that the line about EGM's reception was unrelated to this game. TheStickMan^[✆Talk] 19:55, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

It was issue 61, cover date August 1994. It can be found here. oknazevad (talk) 21:05, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

Does Mr. DJV11181988...

...confirm this Japanese subtitle for a game that he's stated in the article since this revision?
Sincerely,--Gleb95 (talk) 14:17, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Super Street Fighter II. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120911043549/http://uk.gamespot.com/super-street-fighter-ii/ to http://uk.gamespot.com/super-street-fighter-ii/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:28, 5 September 2017 (UTC)