@kevinwalsh: On the PSN store, the plain preorder was 59.99 and the preorder with kombat pack was 80. So it was 20 for me.

1. Jason Voorhees

2. Predator

3. Ash J. Williams (Evil Dead)

4. Spawn

5. (Me) Michael Myers, (Rest of the World) Sweet Tooth

@jwalser3: you must not know Spawn very well.

I don't buy that, and neither do many other fans. Capcom may not have the same financial stature as before, be can you honestly buy the idea that they didn't have enough to make another street fighter? Sony was probably an easy way out. And regardless of reasons, Capcom will take a blow for this, since, given Street Fighters popularity as a franchise, I'm sure many people would have been angry with this decision.

I'm kind of disappointment with the guessed characters lineup. It should have been Spawn, Predator, Jason, and Freddy or Batman.

The Predator would likely add Scorpion's skull to his skull collection.

@theacidskull: I totally buy it, Capcom is a mess right now they were almost bankrupt not that long ago. Also SF as been an exclusive in one way or another for most of its existence, it's only recent games that haven't been.

Spawn would be make way more sense, plus there's way more room for creativity, I mean he's from the underworld for christ's sake, he belongs in mkx.

Jason is going to be boring, so so boring. Sam with predator, he isn't going to have anything new, like a xenomorph would be a better pick and that would still be bad. Tremor is a challenge character from vita, no one cares about him. And I have no idea who Tanya is, so another pointless character.

Meanwhile still no smoke, noob, nightwolf or stryker.

@muyjingo: Are you sure? This site breaks it down for all editions, and the one for the PSN store digital only is 90. I can't find a place on the internet that says you can get the pack by itself for 20.
http://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2015/02/03/mortal-kombat-x-collectors-edition-revealed-range-from-90-180/

@hunterzillas: agreed. Mike Myers would be awesome!

Batman could never be in because DC does not allow fatalities to occur on their characters...though I wouldn't mind having the opportunity to tear his head off

@kevinwalsh: Well, I could show you my receipt lol. I guess it was just a random special/discount they had. It worked though, it's why I bought it.

edit: Actually, why not. See:

It seems you guys ignored it, but I provided a pretty concrete example.

It isn't just his opinion. It's the opinion of myself and thousands of others. It is also pretty much a fact.

Injustice isn't anywhere near as technical as SF. And yes, I've played the game thoroughly. Sorry, but stage transitions in Injustice do not add much to the technicality of the fighting. There are two very simple button sequences (and they're the same for every single character) to pull off stage transitions: if you are on the right side of the stage it's < + A, and on the left side it's > + A (X button if using the DualShock). That's it. After that you sit back and watch as the transition unfolds. Wagers (or Clashes) don't add that much either, sorry. Yes, it takes some skill to learn the timing for pulling off a clash, but after that, it's pretty much random as to the outcome of the wager. Lastly, a "far greater diversity in characters and fighting styles" in Injustice? That comment really betrays a lack of knowledge in general about SF.

(EDITED for clarity)

@omnicrono: I did ignore your comment, and I apologize.

Your example was interesting, however indeed I don't think it is accurate. Injustice certainly has different speed projectile attacks for many characters (Zod, Deathstroke etc), and I'm sure MK9 does as well, although it's been a while since I've played it. So, that example alone doesn't do anything to show StreetFighter as the more technical game.

You say it's pretty much a fact, so I'd like you to back that up. Facts are backed by evidence and proof, which is what makes them so. It's only in the last 2 years that I've really gotten into fighting games (I played them casually in arcades, but was never really into them), and so I've researched them pretty thoroughly.

I've never seen anyone being able to backup the opinion that SF is "more technical". It seems like it may have been true a decade ago, but other franchises quickly caught up.

Go ahead, Google for this discussion, issue in any way you like. Try and find a single reference explaining just why SF is "harder" and "more technical". I've searched pretty thoroughly and all I can find is discussion threads like this, none of which have any proof, and most which show an even spread across people who agree or disagree with the assertion. For a game as old as SF, you would think there would be at least one clear explanation of why it is the superior fighting game...

Now, as far as what you say about Injustice, you're absolutely wrong. Transitions, clashes and interactibles are a HUGE addition to the technicality of a fighting game. It's bizarre to me that anyone would say otherwise, unless they are defining the scope of 'technical' very narrowly, to be specific to combo executions.

Yes, doing a transition is easy..sometimes. They are also easy to block, unless the opponent does a meter burn (yet another element that adds to the technicality of the game) It doesn't matter that it's easy. Doing an ultra combo is also easy. What matters is that it becomes an extra element that you have to watch out for, and that while vying it becomes beneficial to move your opponent into a position where you can transition them. Perhaps using an interactible to bounce them so they can't escape it (Thank you red beam on fortress map).

Likewise, you're absolutely incorrect in saying clashes don't add that much to the game. That's just bizarre. If I'm at 10% health and full meter and my opponent is at 60% health with little meter, I can turn that around, gain a lead in health and win the match. It becomes very important in managing meter and deciding how to use it. That you can say something that can drastically alter the outcome of a game doesn't add to the technicality of a game is very strange to me .

However, it seems that you're just not familiar with the clashing system. It is not random in anyway, and is absolutely deterministic. I think you need to read up on the clashing system before you make false statements such as asserting it's a random element.

And yes, Injustice does have a far greater diversity in fighting styles and characters. First of all, there is the trait system (yet another element adding to the technicality of the game), so character selection becomes very, very important. Do I want a free combo breaker(aquaman), a free combo starter(catwoman), a free shield (lex, doomsday) etc. In addition to that, there is a far wider range in fighting styles. Look at players like Lex, Zod, Flash and Grundy. Each with a distinct trait, fighting style, weaknesses and strength, all who play extremely differently. Can you name four SF characters who are anywhere near as varied.

I'm familiar enough with SF to be questioning the assertions that it is the more technical game. Based on what you have written about Injustice, and some of it being incorrect, it would seem you are not familiar enough with Injustice to make an accurate comparison.

edit: I think also, that this is a good example of many SF fighters who dismiss the mechanics in Injustice as being nothing more than a gimmick, when in fact they are complex elements that significantly increase the technicality of the game.

Am i the only one who was hoping they could find a way to actually put the guest characters in the actual Story? I mean, it wouldn't be hard to do. Predators are basically Hunters for Sport, that kind of writes itself. Jason would be a bit harder, but they can figure out a way.

Anyways, im not a fan of most DLC at all. Sure you say, 'It's just optional, they don't force you to buy it'. True, but that's not the gripe. The gripe is, this shit is pretty much ALREADY on the disc. Its Day-1 DLC! Your paying extra for shit that you pretty much already have, but they put a lock code on it just for more money.

Yep, I was comparing to MK when I provided that example, not Injustice. I'm not sure if Injustice allows some of the characters with projectiles do it. I can't recall at the moment. What I do know is that every character with a projectile in SF can do it. It has been a while since I've played, but if I'm not mistaken, typically in Injustice a character with a projectile only has two variations - a short range and a long range - whereas, again, SF characters have three variations (slow, medium, and fast) and certain characters even have a short range variation (such as Dhalsim's close range Yoga Flame, as opposed to his Yoga Fire that as three speeds all by itself).

Anyway, that is all moot because I was comparing to MK, not Injustice.

No, I'm not wrong about the clash system, nor am I making false assertions. When was the last time you played the game? Seriously though, once your clash has been initiated, you press one of three buttons to make a wager based on your meter, and your opponent presses one of three buttons based on his/her meter, but you are unable to see what your opponent is wagering. Therefore it's a guessing game. There's a random element to it. My man, that's why it's called a WAGER. And you don't do anything after the wager is finished; you simply watch as the clash plays out. I'm not making this stuff up, and I am admittedly baffled by your claim that it was a false statement. At any rate, apart from all that, it's hardly what I'd call deep, technical stuff. See this vid:

@omnicrono: You're absolutly 100% wrong about the clash system. I play Injustice pretty much every day and pretty much have done since it came out.

You claimed it was random. It isn't, it's deterministic. Whoever bet the most meter wins. It's that simple. That you continue to insist it is random just shows you really don't understand the game.

Oddly enough the video you provide doesn't mention the word random once and explains exactly how it works, and just why it isn't random. Did you watch it?

You don't need to see how much your opponent is wagering. It's irrelevant, since you know how much meter they have. If you do clashes correctly, you don't need to know what they bet.

As long as you have (and bet) more meter than your opponent, you will win. End of story.

It can drastically alter the outcome of a game. It's an amazing innovation, definitely adds to the technicality of the game (although I can understand why people might be dismissive before they understand it -- it tripped me up a lot when I was new) and I hope to see the same or similar system in other games.

By the way. Wager, being a synonym for bet, has absolutely nothing to do with 'randomness'. It literally is not part of the definition. All a wager means is that I am putting up something of value (my meter) in the hopes my opponent will not be able to match(which is where timing and strategy play a part, thus adding to the technicality of the game), resulting in me winning the bet (in this case gaining health and/or dishing damage).

You're right that in Injustice most characters only have 2 speed variations for projectiles, although I believe some have 3. Having multiple speed projectiles is only one element however. I would say the clash system and traits etc more than make up for the lack of multiple speed projectiles.

What other points do you have to show SF as the more technical game, aside from multiple speed projectiles?

Now, as a side note, let us clarify how we are measuring technicality of a game. Would you agree the technicality of the game is measured by the features/functions available within the game, which have the capacity to influence the match?

In which case, Injustice has the following features/functions which add to it's technicality:

• Clashes
• Meter burns
• Transitions
• Traits
• Interactibles

I feel like I'm missing something, so may add something back if that is the case. I am omitting features common to all fighting games, such as specials/ultras.

Aside from all characters having multiple speed projectiles, what else is there? Care to make a similar bullet point list for comparison?

lol, Muy... I see what you are saying, and I can also see where you are confused. I wasn't using "random" in that sense of the word. I was using it in the sense of "unknown", "unidentified," "unpredictable." Which, yes, is an equally valid use of the word, but I should have clarified that, so I apologize.

See: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/random

or: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/random (see definition 2)

.......................

At any rate, you got a little too hung up on that word random, when it doesn't at all change the underlying point being made - the fact that there is virtually no skill or technicality involved whatsoever once the Clash has initiated. It's a wager; a gamble.

So no, I'm not being dismissive because "I don't understand the game." I understand the game just fine. If my use of the word "random" is your indicator that I do not understand, I can't really help that.

So yes, clashes in Injustice absolutely 100% have a random element to them. You can't identify what your opponent is doing, and you cannot predict the outcome based on your own wager.

@muyjingo: I'll try to respond to your other questions in your last post, if I get some more time. fyi

Do you think Mortal Kombat X can be played well with a pad? I used to play fighting games somewhat seriously on a fight stick (Super Street Fighter 4), but it's been a while.

Hmm.

I wasn't confused before, but I am now.

I know what random means, no need to link to the dictionary definition.

I understood that you were using random in the sense of "unknown", "unidentified," "unpredictable.", I didn't assume otherwise. Which is exactly whi I said that you are wrong, and precisely why I specifically chose the word deterministic to counter your claims.

And, my point remains. The clash/wager system is not random. It is not "unknown", "unidentified," "unpredictable." It is deterministic. Every single time, it should be obvious to predict the winner, or that it will be a tie.

At any rate, you got a little too hung up on that word random, when it doesn't at all change the underlying point being made - the fact that there is virtually no skill or technicality involved whatsoever once the Clash has initiated. It's a wager; a gamble.

This is where you are mistaken, and I think I can see where you're confused. The clash system is not a gamble, so much as a bet. There is indeed a distinction. A gamble is based on chance, a bet on the other hand is made with confidence. Thus is the case with Injustice, where you should only trigger a clash when you have enough meter to ensure a victory.

Most of the time, if clashes are used correctly (i.e. shield is gone, only red health bar remains, 2 bars of meter or more), there is no question about who will win, or that it will be a tie. The only exceptions are new players who don't understand the clash system and make a bet, not understanding what they have done, or when someone is being beaten badly and lost their shield by someone who still has there shield, and they may wager a little to gain a little more health, and the opponent may not. Or, when someone has enough health that they don't have to bet at all, because they are not affected by it, but may. Although that would be foolish to waste meter, depending how much the health advantage was.

That's exactly why you shouldn't be so quick to dismiss it. It isn't random, it's part of the strategy of the game. Conserving meter and knowing when to initiate a clash play a huge role in the game, and that you don't understand that just means you are not familiar with the game. I don't mean any disrespect, but being that you are so dismissive of the clash system, it simply has to be the case.

When you can be on a sliver of health and come back in the lead...that's an amazing feature that takes skill to use properly. Do you really think otherwise?

So no, I'm not being dismissive because "I don't understand the game." I understand the game just fine. If my use of the word "random" is your indicator that I do not understand, I can't really help that.

I understand the definition of the word random perfectly. It tends to come up a lot in my field (computer security, encryption etc). You are simply using it incorrectly, and no dictionary will support your use of the word as you are trying to apply it to the clash system.

You seem to be insisting that you understand the game yet what you are saying would betray that. Your use of the word random was simply incorrect. So either you understand the game and chose your words poorly, or you don't understand the game and have convinced yourself you do.

So yes, clashes in Injustice absolutely 100% have a random element to them. You can't identify what your opponent is doing, and you cannot predict the outcome based on your own wager.

You're wrong. I don't know why you keep insisting you're not, Please, just play the game a little bit more, because it's clear you DON'T understand the system. You absolutely CAN predict the outcome of a wager, pretty much every single time. Like I said, it's the person who has the most meter that wins. If they bet differently, it's only because a) they have enough health and don't need to bet or b) they don't know what they are doing/are playing incorrectly.

It's a calculated bet, not a gamble based on chance.

For what you are saying to be true, people would have to bet less than their opponent who initiated a clash. That's the only time you wouldn't be able to predict it, but then that person will take a damage hit which is a stupid way to play. So, as long as people are not playing stupidly, it is predictable very single time.

I'm really not interested in discussing this particular point with you further, as it's clear you simply don't understand the clashing system if you continue to think it is random(no point of confusion here, please don't be condescending and try to imply there is). If however you can provide any reference to support your claim, I'd be glad to read it.

I read up on clashes a lot when I was still learning about the game. Not once did I find an article/tutorial/description that asserted it was random. That would basically defeat the purpose, and make it a really shitty game if someone who is ahead could lose the game due to a clash being initiated and having no control over the (random) outcome. I would challenge you to find any source describing the clash system as random.

I won't be replying to this particular point unless you can show something to corroborate it, but do look forward to seeing your list of features/functions that make SF the more technical game when you get around to it.

@muyjingo: Oi...

Yes, there is a random element to it. That is a fact. It's not completely random, but I don't think I ever suggested it to be. No, you cannot predict the outcome every single time, because you do not know what your opponent is wagering. You can predict that you will win the clash (or lose it) every time (if your meter is higher, obviously you will win every time if you wage your full meter), but you cannot predict the entire outcome of the wager.

No worries. I understand it just fine. I'm just not going to make it out to be more than what it actually is. Clashes aren't that deep or technical.

Anyway, I don't want to keep going in circles on this, so let's move on, please.

@omnicrono: Ahh, well there we have it.

See, if you look in your original posts, you describe a clash as random. You don't say it has a random element to it, you just describe it as random. unintentional or not, when you use the word random to describe something without a quantifier the implication is that the entire thing you are describing is random.

That obviously isn't the case, and I agree there is a small random element. My point, is that if people are playing properly, then you can predict the outcome, because why would anyone wager less than their opponent to less to lose a clash? You can see if they bet or not, and if they bet they are either going to match you and tie, or bet less than you and lose.

Some people might initiate a clash accidentally when they have less meter than their opponent, in which case if the opponent were playing properly, he would take advantage of that.

I agree clashes are not that deep or technical, although I would argue they add a much deeper level to the game than having multiple speed projectiles do - although that is subjective.

Happy to move on(I think we are in agreement now), and will await your list for SF when you have time.

@muyjingo: Yep, I did say that, so I apologize. Hasty debating on my part. Just one of those days where I am trying to do too many things at once.

Moving on...

I will try to provide some bullet points later. Can't at the moment.

@muyjingo: huh.......good job getting in on that. I was borderline going to ask for a pic but it seemed kind of pushy. Like "show me your receipt or it didn't happen!" doesn't come off very well. $20 is a price that seems fair, that's what it was for MK9 and I went in on that. This one I'm still 50/50 on. The 2 classic characters I don't have much affinity for and I would like to see how some of these characters play before I throw down 30 bucks. I'm already looking at using Cassie, Johnny, Kung Lao, Takashi, De'vorah, Sub-Zero.........so many. Either way the game looks super rad and I can't wait.

@omnicrono:All good man, all good :)

I'm glad we were both able to argue our points and understand the others point of view.

No worries, take your time. I happen to be free at the moment which is the exception to the rule, so may end up taking a while to reply as well.

@kevinwalsh: For sure man. I wasn't planning to get it, but when I saw it it became easier to justify it at that price. I think I had thought of the plain order as being just 50, and when I realized it was basically 60, an extra 20 didn't seem much of a stretch.

I hope they don't make Predator too powerful. I think one of his weaknesses should be speed seeing as he is so strong in other ways

@bdelve: His three playstyles

1. Austin Powers

2. Shrek

3. Wayne (Wayne's World)