Talk:Street Fighter IV

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Street Fighter IV article.
Article policies
This is not a forum for general discussion of Street Fighter IV.
Any such messages will be deleted. Please limit discussion to improvement of the article.
Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:
Maintained The following user(s) are actively involved with this article and may be able to help with questions about verification and sources:
Master Bigode (talk • contribs • email)
This in no way implies article ownership; all editors are encouraged to contribute.
Archive
Archives
1


Contents

[edit] Story

"While no details of the story have been revealed yet, it was revealed in the January 2008 issue of EGM that the game will take place in between Street Fighter II and Street Fighter III making it (storywise) a sequel to the former and a prequel to the latter."

There has got to be a better way to word this sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.4.65.157 (talk) 08:01, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lock the article

Here comes the vandalism. JAF1970 17:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Good work keeping things clean. Things seem to have relaxed now. Let's keep a close eye on everything until more game details start flowing in. --Nekotaku 18:43, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Just pointing out that the article has been removed. It isn't the best choice for citations. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.148.115.85 (talk) 18:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

GamesRadar has indeed pulled the article for some reason. Can anyone find another source that confirms the Capcom press conference and its contents? --Nekotaku 18:48, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Would this link be sufficient as a replacement? http://www.1up.com/do/newsStory?cId=3163721 --Nekotaku 18:56, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Lock please, and trailer was released.

The official site is "announcement" enough. JAF1970 22:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

http://www.gametrailers.com/player/26535.html--MrBubbles 20:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Link You Need

There's a good one on QJ.net.

http://ps3.qj.net/Video-teaser-trailer-for-Street-Fighter-IV/pg/49/aid/105272
http://ps3.qj.net/New-games-announced-in-Capcom-Gamer-s-Day-event/pg/49/aid/105264

YW. ShinraiTS4 21:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Added a Clean .png of the Logo

'Cause I'm cool like that. WtW-Suzaku 01:45, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New info and characters

It's too soon to create a list of characters. The initial 4 are mentioned in a simple sentence - when a fuller roster is revealed, then we can list it. Just 4 is too few to provide an entire list for. JAF1970 (talk) 15:32, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Official Press Release

It's only available to members of the game media, so I can't link to it, but I can copy/past it. It confirms everything from the 1-up article, though it states it a bit more clearly. I'm gonna rework the article a bit to incorporate the information more cleanly, using the 1-up article as a referance, since I don't think the press release can really be referanced.

Capcom Kicks Off The Next Generation Of Fighting Games With Street Fighter™ IV
The Next Round of the Definitive Fighting Game Experience Combines 3D Graphics with Classic Street Fighter Feel


SAN MATEO, CA — December 6, 2007 - Capcom®, a leading worldwide developer and publisher of video games, today officially announced development of Street Fighter™ IV, the next iteration of the genre-establishing fighting game series. This marks the first new entry announced in nearly eight years, following the acclaimed Street Fighter III Third Strike.
In its amazing twenty year history, Street Fighter has revolutionized the fighting genre and created a global legacy like no other. Few details have been released on the new game, outside of a heart-pounding preview trailer that set the gaming community on fire when it was released in October on the official website, StreetFighterWorld.com.
Capcom is proud to announce the return of four classic “World Warriors” in Street Fighter IV: returning favourites Ryu, Ken, Chun-Li, and Dhalsim. The characters and environments are rendered in stylized 3D computer graphics (CG), while the game is played in the classic Street Fighter 2D perspective with additional 3D camera flourishes. The traditional six-button controls for the game will return, with a host of new special moves and features integrated into the input system. Mixing tried-and-true classic moves and techniques with all-new, never-before-seen gameplay systems, Street Fighter 4 brings a brand new fighting game to fans the world over.
Everything that made the legendary Street Fighter II a hit in arcades, living rooms and dormitories all over the world has been brought to bear here, with even more surprises. With the inclusion of Capcom's latest advancements in new generation technology, Street Fighter IV promises to deliver an extraordinary experience that will re-introduce the world to the time-honoured art of virtual martial arts.


Features:
   * 2D/3D fighting environments
   * Classic Street Fighter characters re-imagined for a new generation of gamers
   * New special moves that go beyond any Street Fighter fan's wildest imagination
   * Amazing locations never seen before in a Street Fighter game
   * New gameplay elements provide new challenges for both newcomers and the most seasoned Street Fighter pro.


For more information, visit http://www.streetfighterworld.com


ABOUT CAPCOM
Capcom is a leading worldwide developer, publisher and distributor of interactive entertainment for game consoles, PCs, handheld and wireless devices. Founded in 1983, the company has created hundreds of games, including best-selling franchises Resident Evil, Street Fighter, Mega Man and Devil May Cry. Capcom maintains operations in the U.S., U.K., Germany, Tokyo and Hong Kong, with corporate headquarters located in Osaka, Japan. More information about Capcom can be found on the company web site, www.capcom.com.
Capcom, Resident Evil, Mega Man and Devil May Cry are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Capcom Co., Ltd., in the U.S. or other countries. Street Fighter is a registered trademark of Capcom U.S.A., Inc. All rights reserved. All other marks are the property of their respective owners.


And there you go! There's also a higher-res version of the logo, but I think the one I uploaded before is fine. WtW-Suzaku (talk) 23:48, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] SFIV News from EGM

Could somebody add this to the article in a "encyclopedic" way ?
-Producer is Yoshinori Ono, who worked on SF Alpha, SF III, and oversaw Capcom Fighting Revolution

-Ono wants it to be the "second coming" of SF II. Wants it to feel like "homecoming" for SF II fans.

-Online play is planned with potential for microtransactions such as new characters and stages

-The look is not really similiar to the teaser trailer. A "cartoon-shaded style that manages to evoke SF II reimagined in 3d"

- runs in 60FPS

- Gameplay sticking with 2D- Ono wants to "preserve the strategic nature of SF II"

-camera doesn't budge

- Trying to get "as many SFII characters in as possible"

- Takes place after SFII Turbo and before SF III

-Controls are traditional- "in its current early state, the game feels remarkably close to Super SFII Turbo"

- Game is more aggressive- more about attacking than defending. Many of the SF III and Alpha gameplay systems have been scrapped.

- Producer says they haven't decided what platforms or even if there will be an arcade version. Version Shane played was running on a P.C

- Ono suggests Capcom could make a PS2 or DS version if "they deem the market suitable"

-Ono not enthusiastic about making it an exclusive- wants to get it out on as many platforms as possible
(From Neo Gaf)Master Bigode (talk) 21:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lack of Research

This entry makes it's references solely on the Electronic Gaming Monthly article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.107.39.149 (talk) 04:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

How many other sources exist at this point? -Toptomcat (talk) 22:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
None. That is the whole point. Whoever keeps making changes to the platform(primarily JuJube), STOP. The only source of info is EGM and it doesn't even state that it's only coming to PS360. the developer said they want to bring it out to as many platforms as possible, not take the usual ps360 route, so why keep it at that? Wait for more Info. Blackbird3216 (talk) 23:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Where can I buy a PS360? Sounds hot :p JAF1970 (talk) 20:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'd imagine the same place that you can buy a Wii60. --DaveJB (talk) 13:38, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New character revealed

http://www.jeux-france.com/images1_4_23471.html

Shouldn't it be mentioned in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.107.4.202 (talk) 11:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] PS3?

Is this a PS3 title or what's the deal? I seriously doubt it's going to be an arcade game only, knowing Capcom's history. — EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 15:37, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Totally unconfirmed; so far all we've heard about platforms is that an arcade version is on the way, and that Capcom was considering as many platforms as possible, including the PS2 and DS if they thought there was enough demand. -- VederJuda (talk) 15:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Well, the graphics simply doesn't look good enough for being the PS3. By the way, do you still have the source where Capcom mentions it going multiplat? Thanks. — EliasAlucard (Discussion · contribs) 16:13, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Here's one from Kotaku: [1] -- VederJuda (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Isn't this coming out on the PS3, 360 and Wii? http://search.ign.com/products?query=street+fighter+4 --WhereAmI (talk) 00:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
Capcom hasn't even confirmed if it will be ported to a home system or not. - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 02:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Akuma is confirmed??

So far, there is no evidence that he will appear in Street Fighter IV; no pictures, no magazine articles, not even a statement by Ono or any person involved in the production of the game.

Therefore, I removed his name from the "confirmed characters" list. When there is a reliable source about his inclusion, then we can add him back. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.107.4.202 (talk) 12:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The info is from an French magazine, called Consoles+, which states that Akuma will play a major role in this game's storyline.details Unfortunately, I can't read French, so I can't say if it's fake or not. - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 15:26, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
Okay, then. I'll add him back to the list, and also the link of this news to confirm it. Thank you for the information! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.107.4.202 (talk) 17:16, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Please god let akuma be in there! (Dan would be nice too) What is it? lp lp for hp hk or something like that? its been so long... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.167.204.104 (talk) 00:58, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it to much. From what I read about Bison coming back from hell, and the story takes place after SSFII Turbo. It is very very most likely that Akuma will appear in this game. Lasttiger (talk) 00:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Minor cleanup

Article looks good - just tighten it a little. JAF1970 (talk) 20:47, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject videogames assessment

Hello, this post is in response to a request at the videogame project assessment department. I've rated the article as start-class low importance, it's evolved beyond a stub, though more solid details are going to be needed for the article to progress - keeping the article stable and referenced in the meantime is as much as anyone can do. There's little else to suggest at this point in time, when the article has developed further please resubmit the article for assessment. Someoneanother 15:14, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Game Apparently Released

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hInWDDXr3jk GameCreator (talk) 18:57, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

It's a demo playable at the AOU 2008. The complete game isn't released yet considering it's not finished. FightingStreet (talk) 19:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] StrategyWiki link

I think it is entirely unreasonable that people insist on removing the link to the StrategyWiki link to the SFIV guide. Yes the game is still under development. But if the argument that the link is no good because the game is under development, than the whole article on WP is just as worthless, and yet it is allowed to exist. The whole point of a wiki is that when new information becomes available, an article and/or guide can be immediately corrected. So there's no legitimate reason to deny users with a link to the StrategyWiki in case they wish to update information that falls outside the scope of WP, such as moves or character bios. While the game is not officially released, the information could still be very useful to any player who is lucky enough to play the game at a test location. I insist that the decision to remove the link be reversed, as other people have clearly been in support of its usefulness. Plotor (talk) 15:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Um, no legit reason? I think the one that said "the game isn't done yet and can change at any time" that was mentioned more than once is legit enough. Every thing in your guide can be turned obsolete in seconds.
As far as the "whole article being worthless given the game isn't done", do a comparison: everything here is related to real world information, and would be expanded if need be thusly. There's no need to remove any of it. Comparatively, if they, say, changed a moveset for a character you'd have to remove the old one from your guide, which is a stark contrast. I for one think your guide is a good idea, but I don't think now is the time for it. Apparently others agree.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
BTW, there's a command list right above the Taito Viewlix control panel. - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 15:25, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but hasn't information in this article been updated and corrected in the past? What makes you think that this is the only source of information that is capable of being updated on the fly? If this article can be updated in a matter of seconds with news that Balrog and Sagat are in the game, why do you presume that the StrategyWiki guide will be prone to rapid obsolescence? The guide can be updated just as quickly, and you still haven't addressed the issue that the information made currently available in the guide can be useful to players who are visiting test locations. I've seen the command list, they are the usual incomplete three to five moves that can fit in the space provided and still be legible. The guide on SW contains a full up-to-date list of moves, which will be maintained in the event that a move list changes. To reiterate: Just because the game can change at any time does not mean the guide can't change just as quickly, or did you forget that that's the whole point of a wiki? Plotor (talk) 15:33, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I think the guide isn't particularly "useful" considering only a handful of people can actually play the game as of now. FightingStreet (talk) 15:43, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
OK, you're opinion is respectfully and duly noted. Others may (and do) disagree. I still don't see how that is a valid reason for denying the link to the guide. If the link will be present in the future, what real harm does it do to include the link today, so that contributors can be made aware of it's existence. The whole purpose of StrategyWiki is to give editors a place to include information that has been, and continues to be, regarded outside the scope of permissible Wikipedia content. Plotor (talk) 15:56, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Because until it's done, the information of today may be wrong tomorrow, and there is no guarantee you or anyone else on StrategyWiki would keep it 100% up to date until that time. To reverse your question what's the harm in waiting? Why *must* it be added now at all costs? Truthfully at this time your insistence seems more in line with advertising your own guide. I'm sorry but that's all I can see here as the reason for all this.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:48, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Ugh, this is ridiculous. The same exact thing could be said of this article. All the points your using to invalidate the link to the SW apply equally to everything written on Wikipedia. There's no guarantee that you or anyone else on Wikipedia will keep it 100% up to date until it is released. However, there is in all likelihood a very high probability of that being the case, and as such, the same is true for SW. As long time fan of the series, and with all due respect, not to rub this in anyone's face, but as someone with direct ties to some of the producers at Capcom who I converse with regularly, I have no intention of letting the guide fall out-of-date with the most recent public knowledge about the game. I would be lying if I said that part of my intention was not to advertise the guide, but StrategyWiki is the appropriate place for video game information that is not technically appropriate for Wikipedia. If the guide can be advertised, then more people will be aware of a) where to find additional information, should they be seeking it and b) know where they can contribute information which can help keep the guide up to date. In essence, your conclusion that the link should be removed will help make it more difficult to remain up to date, so if you were truly concerned about the guide staying current, you should be more inclined to include the link, not less. Plotor (talk) 17:55, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I've said my peace on the subject (though if you wish to claim you speak with Capcom producers regularly I will suggest proof of the matter to further support your stance there. Other than that I have nothing more to say; you aren't really proving a counter argument, and a location test period for a game that doesn't even have the entire roster is not the best time to be sitting down with a strategy guide. Really, just wait until the game is done. Jeez.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:02, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, under what jurisdiction are you entitled to make the decision over whether or not the link should be included, and I am not? Why is my contribution to provide the link less valid than your edit to remove it? Plotor (talk) 19:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

WP:EL. FightingStreet (talk) 21:28, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
a) That's not exactly an answer to my question as to why your call on the issue takes more precedence than my own, and b) I can find several points in that article that bolster the fact that it is a legitimate link, including but not limited to:
  1. Point number 3 and 4 under What should be linked.
  2. Point number 4 under Links to be considered.
  3. You will also note that under point number 13 of Links normally to be avoided, StrategyWiki is in fact one of the open wiki sites included in the Meta:Interwiki map.
I'm having trouble finding a justification for your decision based on anything beyond spite. Plotor (talk) 21:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

StrategyWiki is not only for game "walkthroughs," they also cover all the minutiae that doesn't belong in wikipedia that people looking up information about the game may still find useful. It isn't a crystal ball and doesn't tell what will be there in the future from rumours, it consolidates all the released information about a game in a more wiki-like format. Beyond that, it will have essentially the same drawbacks and benefits as wikipedia itself. I have readded the link now, it would be beneficial to get some other peoples views on the issue. -- Prod (Talk) 17:01, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Why isn't the story up in the article? Contradicting Rufus? Akuma not listed. Gouken in odd place. Ono SF2 characters.

1)The storyline for SFIV was revealed at AOU 2008...

http://arcadeheaven.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/aou2008-sf4d.jpg

http://arcadeheroes.com/2008/02/15/aou-pamphlets-of-street-fighter-iv-blazblue-jubeat-more/

...yet whoever wrote the current Wiki article wants to act as if no story information has been revealed yet.

2) Rufus has been revealed, and is listed in the character section, but just above it the character info states that only 3 new characters have been revealed. Pretty contradicting and confusing to people who are trying to get accurate information on SFIV.

3) Akuma was confimred by Consoles+, he's listed in the FAQ section of Capcom's official BBS forums (which the Capcom employees on there can edit) yet he's not listed in the article.

http://www.capcom.com/BBS/showthread.php?t=21031

4) There's mention of Gouken being in SFIV, but not under the Character(s) heading, but rather the setting, as if Gouken was a stage or location or something.

5) In the 1UP interview with Ono he states that in terms of SF2 characters that they were focusing on the twelve characters from Street Fighter II Turbo, yet this article implies that all 17 characters from Super Turbo could be in the game, which isn't the case.

Actually, Akuma wasn't confirmed. Consoles+ saw some akuma sketches, but this doesn't mean he's in the game. - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 21:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
The Capcom employees on their official forums haven't stated that to be the case. If there were any incorrect info about SFIV in the FAQ on there, they would correct it, not to mention Consoles+ also stated that Akuma would play a major part in the storyline. That kinda goes beyond just seeing sketches of him, they would've had to have been told that information. - TAS 7284 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.92.199.157 (talk) 11:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Reference #14 - used to confirm Sagat and Bison - doesn't seem to link anywhere. I'd change the link myself but this page looks quite complicated and since I haven't contributed myself I don't want to accidently screw anything up. I thought I'd better mention it here. Is that forums link strong enough to confirm all of the characters it lists? I'm not a member myself. Dunjohn (talk) 19:40, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] not dead!?

didnt akuma kill m.bison? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.217.77.232 (talk) 13:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

He did. Ono decided to retcon it. More than likely this happens a lot closer to SF2's time now, probably before the tournament even ended. But that's just speculation on my part.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:07, 30 April 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth, Street Fighter IV takes place one year after the Street Fighter II tournament, according to the AOU pamphlet of the game. 88.161.129.43 (talk) 19:01, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Found the page in question: "yokunen" -> "the following year" 88.161.129.43 (talk) 19:04, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

In SF story what is true today tomorrow isn't. I think nobody can do a SF story; the only thing possible is to show the various retcons that were made during the game releases. Anyway, this seems to follow more the EX universe than anything else. 84.90.24.156 (talk) 20:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

It has already been explained on the official Capcom Japan and USA websites that Bison did die and went to hell and back (in a new body). They also stated that you have to finish the game to get a more detailed explanation. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

To get a more detailed explanation of why this game is just a SFII rehash, if you ask me...--Kim Kusanagi (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Exactly141.149.42.76 (talk) 12:07, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's a rehash at all, but rather a continuation of SF2 that completely explains what hapened between SF2 and 3. Especially seeing as how there alot of things to be explained here. Fan's desperately wanted answers and now they get them with all the characters they love and more yet they still can't be happy. Please, don't do the simple minded/never satisfied thing I'm seeing so much of on Youtube. Just wait for the game to come out. Please? Sabishii_Kage (talk) 05:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

There was no need to explain what happened between SF2 and SF3. Shadaloo is shut down, someone else steps in. I'm sick and tired of these conspiracy theories that people keep making up between Gill and Bison. I am a hardcore SF player and I don't need answers for questions I never made, and I find disgusting how much of a throwback the game engine and roster is turning out to be. I don't need to wait until they release a piece of crap to label it as such.--Kim Kusanagi (talk) 22:52, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

People are assuming this will be the only game between SF2 and SF3, which may not be true… so, any link with SF3 might not happen at all 84.90.24.156 (talk) 20:57, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Whoa whoa, I mean I agree with you somewhat, I guess. Maybe it is that simple. However, maybe it's not. And I didn't say there was a connection to Gill and Bison, I was saying that the characters from SF2 disapeared out of nowhere except for some. Yes AT THE TIME it was because they wanted a brand new game with new characters but now they have explaining to do whether they like it or not (They are including SF2 characters after all). And who is Q? What's Remy's (And Gill's) connection to Alex? Yes I know Alex was considered by Gill to be the next Messiah but I think there might be more to it. Why are Necro's abbilities suprisingly similar to Dhalsim's (Stretching limbs, mid-air plumetting foot driling moves)? Things like that. Not to mention if Shadaloo is just "shut down" and Bison was defeated what's keeping him from ressurecting himself like he has done before. Now they show that he has so NOW they can show how he's not going to be able to do it again. And what's wrong with the character roster and the game's engine? People keep coming up with all of these negatives for the game like this and THAT is the only thing that I find "disgusting". Back in the day people would have just been happy that Capcom was trying their best to make the next Street Fighter, now if everyone is not happy and every little thing isn't perfect to them then the game is considered pointless and crappy. The graphics ARE good, the engine looks solid and seems to make 2D work perfectly in 3D unlike the EX or KOF MI/2006 series, and the new characters (So far anyways) are at LEAST entertaining. I mean we need negatives to make the game better but you can't just sit there and ONLY focus on negatives. I have friends who see this game and it makes them feel happy and excited, but then we have completely negative people like you who ruin it for them. Not to mention this is only a first attempt at next gen SF so give them a break for God's sakes. Thing's like this keep me from being a video game developer... As for the other comment: As I said you may be right but you also may be wrong. So far I'd say it is the only one. We'll just have to wait. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 10:01, 14 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Minor Edits

Bored and hopped up on rockstar so I made some edits.

1) Ono confirmed to EGM in their June 2008 issue that DIMPS is in fact developing SFIV, despite Capcom's earlier insistence that DIMPS was not involved in the project. Discussion can be viewed here: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=288496&highlight=dimps+sfiv

2) The correct spelling of Taito's 16:9 HD LCD cabinet is VEWLIX, not VIEWLIX. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.191.217.246 (talk) 11:26, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Seth and Rufus

Famitsu has revealed the official artworks for Rufus and Seth: http://www.famitsu.com/game/news/1215415_1124.html

Since Abel, El Fuerte and Crimson Viper already have their artworks in this page, shouldn't Rufus and Seth have their ones as well? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.107.4.202 (talk) 17:20, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree. If you're bothering with putting the new character artworks on the page why has nobody added Rufus and Seth? Sabishii_Kage (talk) 07:34, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] PC Version

I have another question. What about the announced PC version? Will it just have the arcade cast of characters or will it share the console version's cast? Anyone know? As for speculation of whether Akuma, Dee Jay, Cammy, or T. Hawk hitting the console version there is no doubt. If Fei Long is then no doubt the rest of them are as well. It wouldn't make sense to a lot of SF fans if they just suddenly disappeared after SSF2T. The people behind SFIV have been interested in getting in as many characters as they can and besides, Akuma is a fan fav that has been strongly rumored/wanted and Capcom is interested in putting in more female characters which no doubt, is probably going to include Cammy. Rest assured the SSF2T cast is probably all going to be in here. But we'll have to wait for official sources just to be sure. Still, anyone know about the PC versions cast? Vgamer101 (talk) 03:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Even More New Characters!?

I know this is very vague, but I came across a forum with this page linked to it: http://www.capcom.co.jp/sf4/mobile/index.html If you scroll down the page you can see small mug-shot art of characters from SFIV Notice after Crimson Viper? It looks like there are even more new characters to be announced. I know it's in Japanese and all, but if I come across a better translated/legit page about this I will get back to you all. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 09:16, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Kakuto already showed that I think. It turned out to be background appearances for certain characters, instead of everyone revealed in one shot.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:40, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

You are right but they haven't been identified yet. Lasttiger (talk) 21:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

All right, should I delete this section I created or what? Probably just waisting space. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 18:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

No, leave it. Prevents someone from asking the question again and everyone having to repeat themselves.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:27, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

From what I can see, that's looks like the last of the roster. All though Akuma isn't listed, he is still probably in it. Lasttiger (talk) 20:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Yea, I agree. People keep asking about Akuma and nothing has been confirmed but you can tell he's bound to be in there; whether it be consule exclusive or downloadable. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 23:18, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing since that Fei Long and Dan along with Dudley, Necro, R. Mika, Sakura, and Ibuki. Those are going to be the console characters. But other than Akuma and the other original Street Fighters, pretty much everyone else is going to be new in the arcade version. Lasttiger (talk) 05:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

I looked in to that, and some of those are actually background characters.Lasttiger (talk) 20:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Concept Art does not equal character confirmation,

Until Dan and Fei Long have actually been confirmed as characters, they should have no place in the article as confirmed characters. Any arguments? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.148.59.150 (talk) 19:23, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

From what I've read around, apparently Famitsu did indeed confirm them as console characters. That's a bit beyond just concept art, no?

Agreed. All concept art usually means anyway is that they have worked on the character's model and animations/moves/story to the point that they are without a doubt GOING to be in the game. The creator has confirmed the characters however; that's plenty enough to add it to the page in my oppinion. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 21:17, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

It is hard to tell people that they are in the game. Find many sources but they won't accept it through their thick skulls/ Here is the official site. If he doesn't believe me, then this guy is being selective 76.102.134.232 (talk) 00:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

http://www.capcom.co.jp/sf4/cs.html

Yes. Either way, Fei Long hasn't been in a game forever. Lasttiger (talk) 03:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah, my apologies then. The only source I'd seen, or that I'd seen referenced in the article was the concept art source. 86.148.59.150 21:03 2 June 2008 (GMT)

They are NOT confirmed. These are just rough sketches used as place-holders to symbolize the Alpha series and the New Challengers from Turbo; the names "Dan" and "Fei Long" don't even appear on that official site you linked to. Source: [2]. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 11:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
Pretty much the usual crap from Ono then...I'm not surprised. I'll work this info in.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

They are in the Fucking game! Quit removing them! I read the news and the official website! What more proof do you need? 76.192.217.84 (talk) 18:47, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

And if you check the sources, Ono's saying they aren't confirmed. I just think they don't know what they hell they're doing really, but the Ono statement is more recent, so we'll see.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 18:49, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry! They are most likely in it, keep your fingers crossed! Lasttiger (talk) 20:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't he said in the video interview that, they will be in? It's also featured in some japanese gaming magazine, right? So, what's the reason it's still not confirmed? --TaZaR 11:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rufus Based Off Of Saturday Night Slam Masters Character?

A person I was talking to on Youtube through video posting claims that he heard that Rufus is based off of a character from Slam Masters. He said he forgot what the name of the character is but he said the similarities between the two are quite obvious. Anybody else heard anything like this before? And if so which character does he mean? I don't doubt that it's true myself though seeing as how Biff Slamkovich from Slam Masters in my oppinion looks suprisingly like Alex and shares a move (Flash Chop) with him. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 05:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

He does look like Jumbo, but the moves are completely different. It's all speculation unless a source can verify. Truth be told, I think he's more a jab at obesity than anything :\--Kung Fu Man (talk) 05:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Wow thanks for the quick reply! Ok just wanted to know. Yes I agree for the most part. I personally enjoy his character: He's an overweight American using (What sems to be) Kung-Fu who thinks he has the ability to defeat Ken. But no, people for now; possibly from now on will just continue to know him as "That fat thing". Poor Capcom, nothing they can do is good enough for some I guess. If I get a legit website about the Slam Masters thing I'll post it. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 06:05, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Buying Wallpapers, Colors, And "Stamps". Also Character Customization

http://www.gamemanx.com/street-fighter/street-fighter-4-update-bison-vega-and-rufus/2008/04/12/

Found this page and it caught my interest. I'm not sure if any of you find this to be a legit source or not. Even more than what's in the title is also mentioned. Let me know what you think. Sabishii_Kage (talk) 06:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Console Characters

Unless a better link is found, the link provided does not confirm 'console characters'. Only concept art. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.83.119.165 (talk) 03:45, 5 June 2008 (UTC)


Thread already started a few paces above this one. Lasttiger (talk) 08:45, 8 June 2008 (UTC)