You misspelt Gouki, any word on a demo??

doubt they'll be a demo - SF4 is the demo

Dee Jay and Adon are my fav SF characters, but I hate SF4, I don't want to buy the game if it plays exactly the same as the first =/

corse it's going to play the same.. it's the same game with extra's

What about it's game play do you not like? It's basically the same 2d fighter just dressed up as if it were 3d.
The moves will be different and having the choice between 2 specials already changes quite a lot. Also the game play is faster as well. There are a lot of changes that I would think warrants another go if you don't like 4

I wish the goddamn SF fans would stop yammering o about how different SFIV is going to be. No matter how tweaked i it is or how many extra ultra combo cutscenes they add it'll still play like freaking SFIV, cause that's what it is! It's like saying that if you didn't like tekken 5 you'll probably like 6 because they tweaked a lot, added new characters and changed the juggle system a bit. Well let me tell you, it's still Tekken and if you didn't like it before you probably won't now, and the same goes for SFIV.

And before anyone drags that tedious shit up: yes, I AM psychic. I played Super SFIV through my magic crystal ball.

I'm an SF fan, but from the gameplay footage I do not think SSF4 will play that differently, I wouldn't careless about a demo otherwise, it would be a preorder. I dislike how casual the game has become, changes from previous games that do more to nerf characters where they don't need to be nerfed. I hope the new characters are worth it, and Ono doesn't work on SF5

@Meg - Who on Earth is yammering about that? The whole point of SFIV was to bring the series back to it's roots anyway. Capcom only signed off on it because it'd be accessible and SF2-ish AFAIK.

I feel like i read it all the time. Every thread, as soon as SSFIV is mentioned. In this thread Tinks does it. I've heard SO many times that the tweaks and new ultra combos will have you playing in wholly new ways, and while you'll have to adapt your strategies based on the tweaks the game will still play very much the same overall. Most people who spout crap like that are probably not even good enough to judge something like that anyway.

Really Furious? Finding tournaments that peeps got hyped about in California (one of the states still with an arcade scene) was pretty terrible before SF4 and after Tekken 5.0. I think if the game didn't become that way then we'd have never seen the an EVO where there were 1,000+ participants for one game alone. I mean the best players are still the best players, you just have a lot of other players to fill out the population and create the excitement and hype I think.I know a lot of good players that jumped ship on Tekken 6 even though they were diehards during Tekken 5.0, 5.1, and DR because they didn't like the rage system, bounce combos, and floor/tier changing bounce combos alone since they changed the game so much. Now I certainly don't think SSF4 will be anywhere near that drastic (not counting character tweaks that may be drastic for said characters), but I'm sure general things like reduced ultra damage and throw priority changes are going to screw up a lot of people. It is called Super Street Fighter 4 after all and not Street Fighter 5 (not sure how familiar you are with SF, but each numerical iteration is extremely different). We won't really know until it's in our hands, but like Furious said above, the game looks mostly similar with some key general tweaks. It doesn't look like entirely new games like Street Fighter Alpha 1, 2, 3 or Street Fighter 3: New Generation, Second Impact, and Third Strike where each of those games were pretty much entirely different beasts altogether due to heavy core changes.

As for Tink's comment--I'm sure you don't play SF4 that much so you probably don't know some of the gripes with it that people have had, but lots of people didn't like the ultra system, particularly pertaining to Sagat and Ryu. The system allows you to make too huge of a comeback, even when you're playing poorly. So if you hate SF4 for that reason, the reduced ultra damage alone may sway your opinion. It's something a lot of people who dislike SF4, but love fighting games, have been harping about for awhile for the community to push through.

HDTran: yes, they are all different, but they are also all unmistakably Street Fighter. Just like Tekken 6 changed a lot of stuff (i'll keep on using Tekken as my reference as that's what i'm most familiar with) it still plays like Tekken. Sure, it took me a while to get up to speed after changing to Tekken 6, mainly because i had to learn the new juggles and get used to the spacing, but in general all the old ideas and concepts are still there. If you knew how the oki worked in T5 you know how it works in T6, granted you might have to adjust your strategies for specific character tweaks.

Anyway, i certainly recognize that there are changes and they will make a difference. You'll notice them for sure, but will they really change the game so much as to have you totally change opinion of the game? I doubt it. If you liked SFIV in every respect except for some balancing issues i don't think you'd be saying that you dislike SFIV to begin with.

SSFIV is for those who liked SFIV, and that's that. If you didn't like it before i still say the chances are slim that this one will suck you in. And if it does it probably has more to do with you than the updates :P

Megido:
Yeah that's true. I'm not speaking for like the super general public, just the huge fragment of fighting game players that aren't playing either of the games due to mechanics, always seems to to be a lot of them. I think the Tekken 6BR rage system and SF4 Ultra system present a lot of problems that people had with K-Groove back in CvS2, but it's sort of even more so because unlike K-Groove, they don't disappear after a timer.

So many people are against both the rage and ultra system even though they're fans of Tekken 5 or Super Turbo/SF3. I'm sure you already see this a lot in Tekken right now, but it's jarring in SF when you might be playing certain matchups like Chun Li (900 stamina) vs. Sagat (1100 stamina). You may be outplaying your opponent and making all the smart decisions and the risk/reward ratio of mid-game makes you both equal. But when if you get Sagat to 20% of his life (the late game), despite playing better and still having 60% of your life, Sagat will now have ultra. Any risk you take, be it a simple jab or throw, can be uppercut > FADC > Ultra and he can shave off 500-ish stamina at anytime for ANY risk (obviously not as bad for other matchups, since Chun Li has low health). Meaning suddenly your 60% health vs his 20% health is exactly the same. You guys probably need one exchange to finish each other off, even though he's 40% lower. So you're stuck waiting doing nothing because suddenly the game is back to an even state even despite you playing well the entire time. It's frustrating and has caused a lot of the community to not play the game. The FADC > Ultra damage nerf alone should still allow people to come back, but not just throw your good play the entire match out of the window. I'm sure that since you play Tekken 6BR that you've seen this happen a lot with the rage system as well, which people seem to have similar problems with--especially with the likes of Bryan, who when low on health, will just force combos that push you into the corner from wherever and suddenly your risk/reward ratio on everything is thrown off because he can just destroy you in so many ways when his damage is ramped up.

As for the super general public, let's be honest here guys--most people that buy console fighting games and don't compete at any level will play it until they've unlocked most things (around 1-2 weeks) and then they'll shelf it forever. A game's quality or difference is questionable when gauging whether these people will buy something. Look at the 3D MK series (Deadly Alliance and Deception), both of those series were almost identical and of course utter crap. One just had hazard environments. However, the second were choke full of crappy mini-games, some new character models that recycled old moves, etc. and suddenly everyone was saying the game was worth getting, even if you didn't like Deadly Alliance despite playing and looking 99% like Deadly Alliance. Just the way things go.

I don't particularly like the Rage feature in Tekken, i wish it was optional, but i don't think it's a game breaker. I mean, sure i've lost rounds to it but in the end it feels like skill is the prime factor. As for the balancing issues in SFIV, i don't really know as i've never gotten that deep in to it but it sounds like a problem that only the hard core player would even be aware of. I mean, try mentioning frame data or something to the average scrub online...they won't know what you are talking about :)

As for the specific scenario with Bryan, i don't think that's really a problem. If you know how to deal with his strings and punish that won't happen. Besides, that strategy is perfectly applicable with or without rage. From your description it sounds like SFIV has much more of a problem in that respect. The worst thing with rage i T6 is that a combo or juggle that might not have killed you without rage actually does so, so it doesn't really impact your strategy to any particular extent, nor does it really force your to play any different.

These just look like shots from SF4 no piont in putting them up claiming there SSF4

Well rage is rage, it changes the risk/reward ratio for every character. Much like if you can bait Sagat in the Chun Li matchup to do something risky or you play super super safe, you can deal with it. Just like trying to play safe and defend/punish any enraged Bryan/Dragunov/Law/etc. Sure it's playable, much like the ultra system is, but any risk you take and every risk they take is suddenly different than what many like it to be--this is by design of course to allow the weaker player to have a chance to come back although lots of people feel that the position of the raged player is better than the position of a non-raged player, especially when you are comparing someone at like 25% life vs. someone who just got rage. Just player preference on whether you like it or not. But there are lots of people that are against it flat out since it allows the thing to swing too far back the other direction for playing poorly throughout the match.

Anyways, this is going off-topic, but I think it's a real concern that isn't necessarily "hardcore," a lot of general fighting game players were turned off to T6 rage / SF4 ultra because of those systems or in combination with the other systems. These types of changes will please the people playing since they become new games.

If we're arguing for just casual players--they aren't turned on by anything in fighting games except character head-count, mini-games, and unlocks. And knowing that, is 10 new characters + expansive online modes + bonus stages good enough for those people to be interested in SSF4 (and not SF4)? Who knows, at least the characters are dramatically different than the existing cast. MK obviously has done it with less truly "new" characters just copying/pasting movelists around. Maybe SSF4 should throw in a crappy Puzzle Fighter ripoff or Mario Kart ripoff like MK and more casuals would be behind it. Adding gimmicky third party characters like Link and Zelda would help too.

Contrived comeback mechanics just devalue actual comebacks.