From: roy@ecgcurly.UUCP (Roy Kern)
Newsgroups: rec.games.video
Subject: Re: Will Street Fighter II kill Genesis?
Summary: This is it folks... (sorry to bother you)...
Date: 9 Apr 92 13:22:54 GMT
Organization: Motorola Cellular Cad Group

In article <1992Apr7.012039.25164@ringer.cs.utsa.edu>, mjbrown@lonestar.utsa.edu (Marc J. Brown) writes (in response to what I wrote):

>The point was that it didn't matter that EGM's cart was unfinished; it was
>NEARLY so.   There are only spot details to stick in.

That is the whole point.  How much is 'nearly so'?  How much more will get
changed in the end?  That is my whole argument:  you don't know, you're just
hoping it stays the way you saw it.  Which is fine.  But by "guaranteeing" it
will be nearly identical, you are potentially misleading the public.

>Stop resorting to the "final version."  I've already explained how they told
>me that the gameplay was the same when it didn't slow down.

Why should I?  How can you guarantee something if it doesn't exist?

>every technical detail I could dig up?  I say the gameplay will be identical
>because there is absolutely NO reason why it shouldn't be.  If people don't

What are you talking about?  There are lots of reasons why the gameplay
might not be identical.  Anything is possible.  Anything.  They could clean
house at Capcom and have some outsider come in and tell them to make it look
more like a Mario game, etc...

>retaliation.  In short, you flamed me.  I responded, and now you and I are
>carrying on a conversation which is more an argument than critic vs.
>reviewer, because *I'm* the only one providing facts.

Prove I flamed you.  You are providing *some* facts. However, you are
extrapolating those facts to some guess work for the final product.  I'm not
saying you are wrong, I'm saying you might be wrong.  I'm playing Devil's
advocate.


>Nothing in your argument suggests that you hope for the best with this port.
>When you said you DID hope for the best, it was utterly contrary to everything
>you argued for in your previous lines.

Nothing in my arguments say I hope the port will be a bust.  Take any of my
replies and include them at will and show me one quote where I say that I hope
the cart will suck.  I'll give you another $100 for each quote.  So how is
my "hope for the best" utterly contrary?  Did it ever occur to you that I
might actually play SFII?  And that perhaps I too am looking forward to the
port, but am not holding my breath after seeing some really terrible arcade
conversions (see Lynx Cyberball) from a lot of different companies?

>>There are enough wretched games out there;
>>why would I want to add another to the list?

>You tell us.  Your standpoint on the subject is quite pessimism.

My standpoint is "I'll believe it when I see it." and your telling me that
that is the same as hoping another game will be wretched?


>Perhaps you should have made it clearer that you hoped it would turn out
>okay... but then, that would have ended the conversation, right? :)

No, that still does not negate my argument that you have no grounds for
guaranteeing anything unless maybe you do work for Capcom.  Or you own
Capcom, etc...

This is my last post on this topic so as to alleviate the pain and suffering
that all the netters out there are suffering by my typing fingertips.
I think you have some understanding of where I'm coming from and that's
good enough for me.  In the future try not to take every posting so
seriously, especially if it's from me.  Hell, it could be worse:  did you
see that flame by Anthony Chen on Rauser?

Roy.
Newsgroups: rec.games.video