Street Fighter 4 Ultra Combos
Friday, February 27, 2009 at 12:13PM Lots of people have asked me why the Ultras in Street Fighter 4 work they way they do. I have no inside information on this, nor have I even seen what the designers might have said, but I have a pretty good guess. After walking you through that, we can then ask if we would include such a mechanic in a new, ideal fighting game. I actually don't know the answer, but I can explain the issues.
When I first saw the ultra system a long time ago, I though it was a terrible, terrible idea. My reason was that the last thing casual players wanted was a SECOND super meter. I mean this isn't Guilty Gear, it's supposed to be simple and elegant, and a new super meter in addition to the old one (which has four divisions and multiple uses) is going to be a confusing mess. I think it turns out there was more to the issue than I thought back then, so let's look at all the issues together and see if the overall effect is good or bad.
But first, let's explore how I imagine ultras came to be what they are in this cartoonized, fictional line of thought:
"How can we get casual players interested in this game? There's lots of ways of course, but one way would be really flash super attacks. Yes, that's a natural answer because we already have had super attacks in lots of other Street Fighter games, and now that we can use 3D animation, camera movement, and effects, we'll be able to make these look even better than ever. So far, this sounds great."
"But wait, how often do people really land super moves? Maybe not quite enough. Think of the spectators, they'd probably like to see these flashy supers a lot. We want to make sure that even beginners see these cool supers, so they can't be some rare trickshot that's impractical in a real match. One problem is that we have this idea about multiple uses for your super meter. You can use it to do a super move, to do ex moves (powered up versions of special moves), or to do ex cancels (like roman cancels in guilty gear, where you do a special move, then cancel it instantly so you can do another move in a combo). Anyway, there is some strategy in managing your meter, and we like that, but it also means that supers will be LESS frequent. Some players will use ex specials constantly, for example, and while that might be a valid strategic choice, it's ruining our initiative to show off the cool supers."
"How about...a SECOND super meter? The main super meter works how we said above, with three different uses. But this new meter could only involve supers...a new kind of super that we'll call ultra. The ultras will be the visual showcase of the game, with camera movements and elaborate canned animations between attacker and victim. We need to make sure everyone gets to use these ultras though. If your opponent overwhelms you, you don't even get a chance to build up the standard kind of super meter. But what if this ultra meter filled up when you GET HIT? Everyone gets hit!"
"In tuning this idea for the ultra, there was somewhat of a conflict. On the one hand, we really want you to fill up that ultra meter fairly fast. If we only gave you the ultra when you have 1% life, for example, it would be too rare to see it happen. But if we give it to you when you still have 50% life, it's just way too powerful of a tool to have. So instead of just an on/off thing, where you either have/don't have the ultra...let's give it to people at 50% life, but keep the damage low. As they get hit more, their ultra meter keeps filling up so that when they do get really low, like 5% life, then the ultra does tons of damage...maybe 50%!"
"This is also gives everyone a comeback mechanism, so even if you're losing, you're still in the game."
"Finally, we want the ultras to be kind of special in that you don't just short kick, short kick, ultra all the time. So we shouldn't let you cancel moves into them. They'll be stand-alone attacks. But hmm...it sure is fun to combo into them anyway, so how about you can juggle into them, throw into them, and things like that to make sure they frequent enough."
That's the line of thinking I imagine lead to the ultra system. I'm not trying to be positive or negative about it with that description, just trying to explain why it probably is how it is. So what do I actually think about it? One factor is my original objection that a second super meter is inelegant and something that exactly no one asked for. I thought Casual Joe would scoff at it or be confused. What I greatly underestimated is how good these ultras would look.
Ultras: Production Values in Action
The production values on the ultras are incredible, and in my opinion are the best looking things in the entire game. The animations are great, solid, powerful-feeling. The effects are great. Some of the game's animation makes me cringe and Blanka's entire character model makes me want to cry, but these ultras really are amazingly good looking across the board. While I predicted Casual Joe would not be down with even more super meters (each with different mechanics...) it seems that Casual Joe's actual reaction is "wow these look incredible!" That also spills over into "this game looks incredible" and gives it an aura that makes Casual Joe completely willing to overlook lots of problems, even art problems, that might stick out.
I'll specifically point out Gouken's ultra as looking and feeling terrific. The shin shoryuken has always been a good concept for a move that feels powerful, but Gouken's version...with 3D camera movement, huge hit pause on each hit (power!), and great animation...made the concept of the shin shoryuken come alive in a way we've never seen until now. A+ on that, if you ask me. Incidentally, he can combo it every time (easily) off a throw, so you're sure to see it often.
So if we ask "did ultras accomplish their mission?" (or at least the mission I'm guessing existed on this project), I have to say the answer is yes. They make the game much more exciting to spectators, they draw in casual players, and they contribute to that aura of good graphics that helps people overlook other graphical problems. But what about the effect on gameplay?
Ultras: Gameplay Effects
The most obvious effect on gameplay is that ultras offer a comeback factor. I still can't figure out why the concept of slippery slope is so hard for some people to understand (they intentionally try to misunderstand it, I think). I wrote an article about that here. The short version is that most fighting games are slippery slope neutral in that the scoring (your health meter) is not related to your ability to score. I mean this in general terms, so ignore edge cases like block damage (if you have only a sliver of life left, you can no longer do the move "block", yes I know that.) But whether you have 100% life or 5% life in most fighting games, your moveset is the same. You still have jump roundhouse and throw, and so on. There would be slippery slope if the more you got hit, the more disabled your character became, as in Bushido Blade.
Street Fighter 4 adds the opposite concept, which I called perpetual comeback in that article. It's really called negative feedback, but that term sounds..."negative" (it's not, it's just a counterpoint to positive feedback) and also people mix up those terms all the time. Anyway, SF4 adds a comeback factor. There are some who are against this in general, and who say a "real" game punishes your mistakes (and therefore a "real" game has slippery slope!). This is where I point out that your mistakes are punished in a game with neutral slope because a mistake means your score goes down (your health bar). It's just that your score going down doesn't make it less likely for you to win by reducing your ability to attack, which would lead to first hits being way too important.
So neutral slope is good, I think, but what about this comeback force? Can it also be good? This is a very delicate question because it depends so much on specifics. I think a game having a mild comeback force is usually fine, though when it becomes too strong, it throws things way out of whack. Another thing to consider is how easily you can make a comeback anyway, naturally, without extra forces (like ultra combos) stepping in. Here are some rules of thumb: if defense is really strong in a game, comebacks are hard. If offense is really strong in a game, comebacks are more possible.
Imagine a game where offense is, for the most part, really good. In this game, throws have instant startup. Even if the opponent breaks a throw, they still take damage. If you just sit there (trying to sit on a lead), you are open to throws. Also in this game, knockdowns are powerful. You can't vary the time you get up, so that makes crossups more powerful. It's also hard to reversal attack (a bad way to design things, but just go with it for now), so attacking a rising opponent is good. Stages are fairly small so you can't run away. Finally, hit point totals in general are actually really low, so even when you're behind, you aren't THAT behind. You can always go on the offense because, well, offense is strong.
Now imagine a different game where it's much harder to naturally make a comeback. Hit point totals are higher in general so that means when you're behind, you're actually further behind than in the first example game. Throws are weak with 3 frame startup (or worse, 5 frame startup for Ochio throw). Throws can be escaped for zero damage. The playfield is really big, so running away is more possible. Knockdowns are weaker (meaning offense is weaker) because reversal attacks are incredibly easy and varying your getup time helps a bit to weaken crossups. (Well sort of...). Anyway, all those things point to the power of offense lowering and the power of defense increasing, relative to the first example game. This second game (SF4) needs some comeback mechanism, that's for sure.
Ultras do provide that. I think ultras have an unintended negative effect though: the ends of rounds were supposed to become more exciting, but instead they sometimes become more boring. One of my friends who played me the other day remarked that it was frustrating to him that some rounds he would beat me down, but then toward the end, he had to play very carefully and conservatively. He just gave me a 50% damage ultra that I could randomly throw out as desperation at who-knows-what time, so he had to switch playstyles to a more boring one, basically.
Another situation that occurred in a match against him was when I had him at just under 50% life. I was Rose and just got my ultra. I thought about how if I use it soon, I could hit him (which is easy, it's like perfect anti air and beats just about everything), but I would not kill him. So maybe I will hit him a few more times, then do the ultra for the win. But then I thought, wait, what if he hits ME a few more times instead? That will actually power up my ultra enough that it will kill him outright! While it sounds better to hit him than to get hit on purpose, it did feel like the next few hits hardly mattered. (Epilogue: I got hit a few times, I ultra'd, I won.)
A New Fighting Game: Ultras good or Bad?
So I've been wondering, if we were to make a new fighting game, the ideal one, would we include something like ultra combos? It seems the market has spoken on the issue of complexity of two meters versus awesomeness of these supers. Awesomeness won. Now imagine all the extra hype, press, casual interest, and spectator interest our theoretical new fighting game would get from ultras....(at lot, right?) and compare it to the extra sales and interest we'd get from making sure the ends of rounds between experts aren't boring because they don't need to shift to cautious mode as much. Even if we did improve gameplay by avoiding cautious ends-of-rounds, it doesn't sound like a very good bullet point on the box, does it?
And even more to the point, it seems that when looking at this purely from a gameplay angle, it's a better solution to make comebacks more possible in a natural way by making offense good. Games with good offense have proven to be fun over the years, while games that allow defense to win are boring to play and watch. (And note that even games with lots of offense like GGXX and ST have defense too, it's just that attacking is good.)
So from a gameplay standpoint on our new theoretical fighting game, we might be better of with no ultra system at all, but better offense (and fewer hit points, perhaps). Even if we had a game that allowed comebacks naturally...would we STILL want the ultras anyway? Again, the idea that you get hit to fill up a special kind of super meter means that you will always be able to do that super before dying. It's a way to ensure that spectators and casual players get excited at awesome super animations that happen all the time, so is it really worth it to lose out on those benefits even *if* you believed that gameplay suffers? That's the scary thought I wrestle with. I'm not against comebacks, but when the mechanism to facilitate them is extreme enough to introduce some ill effects, and when it's possible to allow comebacks anyway with overall shifts in the design, I just don't know. It's a collision between trying to make the best gameplay possible and trying to make a game popular and get noticed. Maybe a good solution (for the theoretical game, not for SF4) would be to have one super meter and that supers are amazing looking, but we simply accept that they don't happen quite as often as in SF4. I leave it as an open question.
Reader Comments (87)
"I'm saying that when you look at what people think about the game, they seem to get excited about the ultras."
Fair enough. I do agree with you that it's good to have features that get casual players and spectators excited, especially if you don't already have brand recognition and are trying to be noticed. It saddens me that it's necessary to annoy hardcore players for the sake of popularity, but it's most definitely not a deal-breaker if the game is otherwise incredible.
"t saddens me that it's necessary to annoy hardcore players for the sake of popularity"
Well, c'mon. If capcom tries to sell this game to the people that would get actively annoyed by the ultras, they'd lose a TON of money.
For casual/fun players, the ultra system doesn't only give people the "WOW THATS COOL!" effect, it also gives them a way to feel that they can always come back. Too many fighting games have characters that get an early lead and then sit on it, leading to boring play.
As sirlin said, (some of) the Ultras are so good, that you get the reverse effect, where people are afraid to finish anyone off, but knowing you have an option against that turtling bastard across the screen has to be a positive thing for newer players.
I wonder if it would be better to make a change where the Ultra Meter could not increase in damage, and you could keep it between rounds. Maybe I'm overthinking it, but I imagine that if Ultras weren't a one-shot deal, players would think harder about how to manage their meter, and use it differently.
I would do this frequently when I played Street Fighter Alpha 2. If I used a custom combo at any point, I would afterwards carefully consider the circumstances from then on. For example, it's nice to land a Level 1 Custom Combo with Chun-Li, but let's use a specific situation: I won the first round, and I was close to losing the 2nd round, would it by worth it to punish a whiffed move with a Lv. 1 CC to start my comeback? Or, should I wait and see if I can make a better comeback and just hold onto it? In a worst-case scenario, I'd lose the round and still have my meter, allowing me to make quick work of my opponent in round 3 with a Lv.3 CC.
I realize this isn't a perfect analogy, cos there's no separate meter for CCs in Alpha 2, but the point is clear, I think. Since Ultras are "now or never", I think people fish for ways to use them instead of strategically considering whether or not it's a good idea to use them in a given situation, especially since you can combo into them much more easily than you could combo into supers in ST.
Ultras are a good gameplay mechanic. Take for instance Boxer or Chun's super in ST, or Ryu's. Exact same scenario - once Boxer or Chun or Ryu or Fei or whoever gets super meter, the matchup totally changes and you have to be more cautious. Not everyone has the same luxury obviously, but neither does everyone have the same luxury in SF4. Rufus and Guile don't gain an extra threat with a full meter, neither does Viper (haha). Most of the cast doesn't gain anything more than a high risk reversal move or a big combo finisher. Only a few people do, like Rose, Chun, Ryu, etc.
Also really cool is that Ultras aren't safe, pretty much universally. If you block even Ryu's metsu hadoken at close range, he's unsafe - at farther ranges, some characters can still counter ultra or at least deal some damage. So even though Ultras are this big comeback tool you really have to pay attention to what you're doing, or you'll just get hit by their ultra or at least a combo.
I think that in the area of ultra combos, SF4 totally succeeded - they're interesting gameplay tools, they're flashy and stylish to watch, and aside from Rose's ultra, not that lame to watch repeatedly. It is pretty lame to watch Rose shamwow you over and over, heh.
Sirlin:Just wanted to post that i really liked your answer, thanks for it. I have nothing to add as i have to agree with your point there.
Response by Sirlin: Really? Ok great!
Fistful: Good points. :thumbsup:
[quote]How's this for a potential fix: overlapping meters. You have just one, 4-segmented super bar. You can do EX moves, that eat up 1 bar and cancels that eat 2, etc. Your second bar is UNDER the 4-part bar, and rises equal to it. When that sub-bar is full, you can do the equivalent of the weak ultra (what an odd phrase). If both meters are full (which, essentially, means filling super without using any meter), you can blow both bars on the big ultra.
February 27, 2009 | Chris A (CodexArcanum)[/quote]
Man that's a really good idea. I love it. The more I play SF4 the more these ultras piss me off.
Ever noticed that when you finish off an opponent with an Ultra Combo, the announcer will say "Ladies and gentlemen, the ultimate street fighter", even if the match wasn't over yet?
I don't know the game well enough to really comment on whether Ultras are good or bad for overall gameplay.
But I HATE the camera-angle-altering, unpredictable-length cutscenes we're forced to watch every time an ultra comes out. It completely interrupts the gameplay. Someone will do an ultra (let's say Honda for instance) and I see it coming a mile away. I have Ryu and I want to DP him out of it, but it's a huge pain in the ass because I can't predict exactly when the animations are going to end and the gameplay is going to resume.
It is possible to counter them like this, and I guess after a while everyone will have the timing down, but it's pretty annoying. I really hope everyone's ultra animation is the same length of time, so countering them is at least learnable.
It would be great if it could just have them operate exactly like a super move does. The special startup animation could be saved only for cases when the game has calculated the move will definitely be landing on the opponent. That would be a really big problem to program that way though, so I understand why it can't be done.
A pretty painless/easy to implement fix and one I assume is coming with the inevitable SFIV:Alpha, v2, "CE" (Champ. Edit. being most likely as already being thrown around by director Ono in interviews all the time)
Is simply allowing an attack to take away some Ultra / Revenge meter on successful hit.
I assume Focus attack is the key attack for this, even as complicated as it is as of now with 3 types and Dash Cancels integrated.
Its a two-fold or 2-way street considering you can take one hit that's not "Armor Break" and gain Ultra meter, why not allow a successful planned one on an opponent lower theirs? In the vein of VS series, snapback to get a character out of the field of play, not successful often or the same in theory but the right kinda series of moves; EX series, armor break - which Focus is expanded upon, considering there is no more Guard Break meter from Alpha and SF-3
An attacking / winning & favor slope character still has a reason to continue pressing, not necessarily rush and making it too powerful, but fair enough of a playing field to make the range closer and still end of match near tension - yet not all of it is in the losing player's favor with an almost anytime last second "saving grace." Which is what Ultras are most of the time now, forget JP language/region version of "Focus = Saving."
Unheard pleas to reiterate to nobody in particular and most likely unheard JP developer ears for SF4,v2:
-Smaller playing field so its not a chasing - sit in the corner - cat and mouse game. (*)
-Option to turn off menu music J-pop or toggle to the classic character stage tunes remixed - heard in lobby (of which you get either milliseconds of if joining a room, or an option to toggle within the room you host whilst you wait so there is no remake in order to hear a non looping / opinion better one of your choice)
(* Cammy cartwheel backdashing exclusively, or Sakura dash and return is a bigger pain in practice than lame duck Air Fireball Akuma spam, E.Honda holding walking back no fun if punishable much easier than Blanka doing the same. Much easier to tolerate in SF:HDR. Shoto back jumping easier/faster than most any forward dash being the last level behind all of the rest. They could have allowed or should allow running then with a dash and hold direction to counter this in addition to smaller horizontal stage area, if not instead. Leading to an onscreen actual cat and mouse game, but its Street Fighter, not ring around the rosey - chase the weasel - dunce cap wearing corner practice, "turtle style" or no turtle style.)
You say that playing defensive makes the game boring? I personally find enjoyment the moment one of us gets an ultra meter up, everyone plays more conservatively, it feels more tense, one mistake, BAM. Perhaps this may get old at some point, but as of now, that feeling of tenseness, the feeling that any mistake means doom transitioning from a feeling of relative ease is something gratifying to me. I like that the game creates a bias to play aggressive or conservative, rather than remaining one way or the other the entire game.
I caught an SF4 commercial on TV and 90% of the gameplay footage it shows is during Ultra Combo canned animations.
Let's hope "Championship Edition" means something and they'll cater to the core players that want to play the game for hundreds of hours in a competitive setting.
I never really understood the whole idea as to why they would make the whole Ultra concept as a form of comeback. When SF4 news started surfacing, I heard the idea was to have a casual person be able to take on a hardcore person on a somewhat equal level. I always thought STHD accomplished that, really. The game had 2 life bars, a time limit, and a super bar. There were some tricks to pull off that could separate a casual with a vet player but otherwise, it was a pretty approachable game. I, being a casual SF player, felt like I could keep up with pros and still enjoy the game. I'm not that "unskilled" at fighting games, I consider myself intermediate at best.
SF4, I feel, kinda has that huge "wall" between the new players and the rest of the pack. I can't say I would see a new player picking up the game and being able to hit more advanced levels without some sort of outside guidance. While I do believe that seeking help outside of the game is always a plus and I encourage that, there should be things you should be able to pick up just by playing others. It's like the whole Short, Jab, Short, Special Move thing. You see it and you're like "oh, short, jab, short, hadouken, good" when it's really "short, jab, quick pause, short, hadouken" and you'd never know unless someone pointed it out to you. I can keep up with pros in SF4 but if I were to try to get someone who never played SF of any sort before and try to get them into this game... It'd be nearly impossible.
I still like SF4 though and I would encourage people to play it regardless. I just wouldn't say that this is very close to SF2 as most people would state that it is... Though I guess you can easily play it like SF2... Maybe... Okay, probably not when you start fighting more knowledged opponents.
One of the problems I have with Ultras is that they make Focus Attacks kind of useless. As soon as an opponent gets their Ultra you can't do your FA anymore unless you want to receive a canned animation to the face. Supers make it harder to do your FA as well but at least you have to earn those and since they usually don't go as far or fast as an Ultra you can backdash then block if you're quick enough. It's strange that they would put in one feature in a game that makes another one occasionally useless.
to the people saying Capcom are "sellouts" for making the game flashy and popular instead of a "real man's fighting game": you are making the classic hardcore gamer's mistake of having a myopic perspective. (This is also related to what most people here think "casual" players are, and the thinly veiled contempt they have for them. But that's another topic.) Street Fighter IV WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN MADE if it was the kind of game the upper thin crust of the former SF elite community wanted. Capcom did not want to spend any significant funding on SF3: 4th Strike or Super Turbo 2 EX Ultimate. (Notice the under-funding and resulting rough edges of Super SF2 HD Remix, such as bad redrawn animation, no provisions for retakes to fix even basic problems with sprites, etc etc.)
The only way SFIV got made at all, and the only SFIV anyone was ever going to get, was by "pandering" as the hardcore see it, to the rest of the planet. Whine all you want, it's all irrelevant. (Though oddly, nobody among the self-styled experts is answering the question: how are Ultras bad when Supers are good and give the player in the lead an instant killing move against the player who's behind in "score"? Bullshit that prior SF games were slippery slope neutral.)
As for the overall issue of the Ultra system itself, I believe one aspect Sirlin is biased over is that round ends becoming "boring". This is purely a matter of subjective taste, play style, and most importantly, expectations. The experts expect a round of Street Fighter to play out one, and only one, way, according to a specific plan. Ultras change that plan and so it must be "broken". In all my playing of SFIV so far, the usual response I have to the end of round state is increased tension and excitement because I know now that I cannot fuck this up. I cannot be loose, I cannot take arrogant risks, and I cannot play with my opponent because they are now the dangerous and cornered animal who can maul me. I have to figure out how to take them out with a new layer of mind game that exists in end of round Ultra charged state in SFIV. Do I try to make them blow their Ultra with misdirection? Do I lock them down so they don't have a confirmed Ultra window? Do I know how to snuff their ultra? Am I in a position where my next move will force him to try and go head in and snuff the ultra?
Believe me, I understand the indignancy of experienced players how take a glance at the game and believe they're being punished for winning. But I believe they are entirely failing to comprehend the new layer of meta game that has unfolded here. The Ultra system and its flashy moves were co-opted to make the game more appealing and fun for a wide audience, but it's not just a crutch for a perceived incompetent "casual" player. Here, Sirlin's core mistake is proceeding into his analysis still not accepting that that it's SFIV's presentation, not it's play mechanics, that are designed to draw in the mass market and rekindle interest in the SF brand, thus he is determined to find the fatal flaw in the game mechanics that exists solely to please casual scrubs who have no right to be touching holy Street Fighter in the first place :p
So im curious how you would compair the ultra meter in SF4 with the Insta-death move in GGX2.
both i would feel are comeback, or desperation moves. through i would say that you would have to do a bit more pre planning for GGX.
Response by Sirlin: Ultras happen about ever round. Instant Kill is a non-issue. You can play 1,000 games of GGXX and never see it. I experience an Instant Kill like once per year in that game.
Ultras are fine. Ultra damage is reduced if you combo it, and Ultras are unsafe, so you can bait an ultra.
My opinion on this: (on a bad keyboard, so can't type well)
For your game: I'd have the following system:
I'd have two meters also.
First meter would be your standard meter: used for these things:
EX Specials
Breakshots/Alpha Counters (though I'd make a rule that you can't die to Alpha Counters)
Burst
Full meter allows for super
Second meter would be damage based
These options:
As the meter increases, your defense increases so you take less damage. This allows for comeback without going into negative feedback territory- as the other guy gets it too
When full- ultra. Ultras would be non-comboable, and designed to outprioritize. Unsafe.
Once per round- rage explosion (Taken from Samsho)
Effects of Explosion:
You burst like Guilty Gear- so this can be used to save your behind.
When burst- you do more damage
The clock stops. So it's an anti-timeout tool for a bit.
You can do your Ultra to end it.
When the Explosion ends- you meter is gone for the round (or match if you want to make it limited)
I think customizable meters would be the best solution. If you let people disable ultras and supers for, say, a passive 10% damage bonus - something to that effect - then you give casual players the option to have simplified, Hyper-Fighting-style gameplay without throwing away the flashy ultras that look good in magazines, on Youtube and on the back of the box.
Hardcore players would take advantage of this as well. Old school 'head' players would jump at the chance to simplify the game so they can focus on the fundamentals while 'hands' players like Daigo and Valle who can reflexively combo and juggle into anything would probably opt to use supers and ultras.
To me, the future of fighting games is in customization. I dream of the day when someone puts out a fighter that allows you to build your own characters from basic templates like you can in a game like World of Warcraft - without the leveling, obviously. Slap a small monthly fee on it so we can get regular balance patches (lack of regular patching is what hurts fighting games the most) and that would be the perfect fighter.
This isn't 1994. There's no reason for us to live with massive character imbalances and inflexible rules. It's time to move the genre forward.
Response by Sirlin: it's kind of a bad idea to do this "with ultra" and "without ultras" game. It splits the community and makes it confusing what the "real" game is. For a party game or something, that's fine. But for a competitive game like Street Fighter that is intended to have a community that all plays the same game, it's iffy.
Furthermore, it's not so clear that customization is "moving forward" rather than moving backwards. There is something to be said for knowing exactly what you're up against (Zangief, for example) rather than a collection of who-knows-what. Magic: The Gathering does will with customizing of course, but it's a turn-based game where you can read each card. In a fast-paced real-time game, fighting a collection of who-knows-what sounds worse, not better than what we have now. It would be casual friendly for sure, but it's certainly not clear it would be a better competitive game.
I don't know. Unless you guys have ADD, Ultras aren't that long in animation. And most of them, if ALL of them have long start up and are easy to read. The only times for guaranteed Ultras, in my opinion, are in link/juggle combos and the damage is scaled down anyways. The only Ultras that I see are dangerous are Sagat's (cr.hp link Ultra), C.Viper's (high jump cancels, thunder punch cancels into ultra), and perhaps Zangief's (hard to jump out of if ticked). Otherwise, Ultras such as Ryu's has to be done in something such as Shoryuken, ex FADC, then Ultra and the damage is wayyyyy scaled down. It's not that I don't like Sirlin's idea or anyone's else opinion against it, they're still good alternatives; but, I think this is too much whining and over reacting.
Response by Sirlin: All I'll say is you seem to misunderstand what a discussion about game design *is* in the first place. I'm not saying your ideas about Ultras are bad or anything, but to call an analysis of the good and bad aspects of Ultras "whining" is pretty insulting. If I said the film Independence Day had poor character development relative to other films, would you call that "whining"? It's at attempt to explain how things are, how they could be different, to advance the craft, etc.
It is pretty easy to correct the problem of long cut scenes. Just do what most games in other genders do. When player 1 lands an Ultra, the second player 1 presses another button the Ultra animation ends (maybe he has to press start or a button combinatiion so newbies won't do it by mistake). That works well for soccer games. If you want to watch your goal's replay, you can. If you don't, you can just skip it.
So new players will do a lot of Ultras. Players a little more experienced will use it too, but will skip the now boring animations most of the time. The guy doing it can be a jerk and simply let the full Ultra go. Yet, you'll only have this problem against jerks, which is still better than allowing the person receiving the Ultra to skip the animation (or else you may never see your Ultra).
Another option would be to go on Options and select "no silly animations" or something like that