Both Capcom and NRS released the best games of their series within a few years of each other...that's a blessing for Fighting game fans.

In before the lock lol Troll much dude?

A question :

Do you buy a game, invest your time on it, based on:

- Online sites reviews, sites scores, people opinion, comparison with SF ?

or

- Testing the game itself before, judging by yourself how the gameplay and fun factor are, and sending to hell any other opinion that is not your own ?

Words of an expert in fighting games...Shut up fanboy.Saying SF is a bad game whithout giving any explanation comes from the close minded and ignorant people...as always.

MK 2011 is a good game,from what i've seen this time the gameplay aspect was nailed.

This.
I was also blown away by MvC3, and as I said before, Dissidia 012,
so it's been a great year to be a fighting game fan.

Tell your friends that if they have to rely on metacritic numbers to make their arguments, they are *terrible* at debating.
If all they care about is Metacritic, remind them they shouldn't be playing anything except Little Big Planet or Fable.

Katy Perry may be the most popular musician EVER for all I care-
I still wouldn't let her suck a fart out of my ass

Ok youngin pay attention, I'll drop some shiny pearls of wisdom on you free of charge. Life lesson number 1. If you want respect, you give respect. For example, if you're asking for help from ANYONE ANYWHERE for fucking ANYTHING it's wise to you know... NOT come across like a dick.

Secondly, I can only assume that you're a teenager if all you want help with is "how to keep my SF loving classmates from making fun of me for liking MK because I want to fit in! " This leads us to life lesson number 2; Learning to think for yourself, form your own opinions, regardless of what your "friends" believe, is a rite of passage to adulthood.

Finally, realize that arbitrary review methods for games, movies, books, music, etc. don't mean anything if YOU enjoy it. Which leads us to the third and final Life Lesson; Opinions are like assholes, everyone has one and they're usually full of shit.

You're welcome.

SF is for mortals... MK RULES!!!

Woah haha its my opinion back off. I hate SF I remember playing it as a kid, I hate it with every inch of my body. Its a damn cartoon. If I wanna see a cartoon ill go watch cartoon network or something. We shouldn't compare anyways like Garlador said. And yes I am a MK fanboy. Damn proud of it.

I think it is time for me to register at TestYourMight.com

Not to be contrarian, but it's MK's characters that die- not SF's

Golden eye was the best, thus every ffsp today sucks and im never going to play any of them ... actually no I will play them and bitch about them on the internet.

Your obviously a troll looking for attention (in which case you win congrats)

but in the unlikely event that your being serious :Yeah street fighters a good game, that dosent make other games shitty. Its also a completly diffrent game with very diffrent mechanics

Fuck your retarted lol. Your like somone who watches justin beiber videos to make fun of him.... get a life man, for real.

Agreed.

SF and MK are totally different animals.

I love both of them, but both have a special place in my heart (kind corny but it's true).

This game rules.

And metacritic can suck it.

Well actually MK characters never die really

please get the fuck out, i actually enjoy playing mk,
Never liked sf, never really played sf, played every mortal kombat , i couldn't care less that sf4 gets a higher score than mortal kombat. Mortal Kombat is and will always be the more fun game for me, and im sure that many more people feel the same way.

*Sigh*
Street Fighter and Mortal Kombat are two entirely different franchises. That'd be like comparing Resident Evil to Silent Hill (as others have said) or to Clock Tower. (Banjo-Kazooie to Illbleed, Quake to Goldeneye, etc.)

Mortal Kombat (9) is the best Mortal Kombat game yet. If you don't like it, that's fine, but just know, this is as good as it gets for the series, for now.

And as for Metacritic, it summed up The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess with a 96. That's a terrible sign. That is one of the bleakest, most boring, and disappointing games I have ever played.

Don't get me wrong, I love SF.

But metacritic can suck a huge donkey ball.

People's preferences aren't proof of what's better or worse.

If people's preferences were important, Britney Spears should be considered a better musician than Dream Theater. Popularity and quality are not synonimous at all.

If this is about peer pressure, and your buddies making "fun" of you for choosing MK, and the whole argument boils down to which has the higher metacritic, then you need to just step back, formulate your own opinion, and grow some thicker skin.

We ALL have games we love that our friends hate, and I'm sure your friends enjoy playing games you hate.

One of my favorite games is the lowly-rated Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness, a game I found incredible and robust yet Castlevania fans despise it (though I wager 98% never even played it). All my roommates play Call of Duty religiously, but that game does nothing for me and I really don't like it.

Don't be afraid to swim upstream, to formulate your own ideas, and to hold an "unpopular" preference. You're not a robot in a hive mind collective. Think for yourself. Find games you enjoy. Metacritic is nothing more than a collection of opinions, and opinions can be wrong.

Look at the game Perfect Dark Zero. When it came out, it was given very high scores. It has a high Metacritic rating. And now? It is generally agreed the game was shoddy, poorly made, insultingly bad game that people wanted to be good so bad that it bloated the scores to be higher than the game deserved and it is now routinely seen as one of the most disappointing games ever made.

Inversely, I've seen many critics apologize for rating Team Fortress 2 with lower scores. After building a passionate, devoted community, the game is widely held as one of the most enjoyable, friendly, and accessible team-based games ever made and many critics wish they could change their original scores that Metacritic has for the game. The game ultimately grew and their initial impressions were wrong.

Metacritic is like Rotten Tomatoes. It is not the final decree of a game's quality. Time sheds new light on old opinions, and in the end NOTHING matters, not friend's opinions, not Metacritic, not sales, not anything.... but your OWN opinion.

If you love the game, that is ALL that should matter.

^^This

Different strokes for different folks. I have always been better at MK than SF, so I like MK better, BUT SF is amazing, and it always has been.

Like others have said, they aren't the same so comparing is pointless.

I don't think that you're a troll. But you have to realize that Metacritic is one of the biggest banes of both the game industry's and game reviewers existence right now.

You have to look past the scores when determining what games to play, because reviewers honestly get paid to do what you and I can do just as well: Determine whether a game is an enjoyable experience. That's really all they do when you boil it down. They're not special. Their opinions are, in most cases, just as informed as yours or mine.

Literally the only difference is that they get to play the games first.

Most people that grew up playing a lot of video games and still play a lot of video games have just as valid an opinion as any webstie reviewer. Don't let the fact that they get paid to review games fool you in to thinking that they're opinion is somehow more important than your own when determining the quality of a game.

In my opinion, Street Fighter 4, Super Street FIghter 4 and MvC3 were all well made games that didn't hold my interest beyond a week. That's just me. I've been playing the new MK game nearly every day since it came out almost a month ago and I'm not even remotely tired of it yet. But again, that's just me.

Someone else that's played video games all their life could approach all of those games in a completely different way. Maybe someone else loves MvC3, likes MK and hates SF4 for whatever reason. That doesn't make my opinion better or worse than that person's and it doesn't make them an idiot for hating SF.

Assassin's Creed games almost universally get good reviews and I want to like them because the settings are phenomenal but the gameplay bores me to tears. Does that mean I have bad taste? How about the fact that nearly all first person shooters bore the crap out of me?

And yet I've played all of the major first person shooters, I've played nearly all of the top sports games out there, I've played most of the best RPGs that have come out since the NES days and the same goes for fighters and the 16 bit era.

When does someone have enough credit for their opinion to matter more than anyone elses? The answer? Never. When it comes to video games, it's completely subjective and your opinion of a game, of a series, even of a genre is your own based on what you like, your opinion, your past experiences etc.

Don't let anyone spouting scores tell you that your opinion is stupid. It's not. Most game reviewers will tell you that they hate giving scores because it's boiling their entire work down to one number. Nevermind how they arrived at that number or how that number comes together (ie what factors are weighed when that number comes out).

IGN's reviewer really liked MK but he gave it an 8 because he didn't like the boss battles and one or two other small nitpicks. He also didn't like the cheese factor in the story mode. Nevermind the fact that MvC3, which got a higher score, had almost no single player modes to speak of and no story mode.

To me, he weighed things incorrectly but to him, he judged the game based on what was important to him and I'm sure that to him, it was a fair score.

So again, you don't really know how these scores come together. So taking them in a vaccum like that and saying "well all of these people that get paid to do this say X" is just wrong. It's a disservice to those reviewers, it's still incredibly slanted because it's such a small amount of the gaming population and most importantly, your opinion isn't even taken in to account.

Don't like or hate things or assume that they're good or that they suck just because someone else points to statistics. Statistics like game scores are meant to be an indicator, but in the end it's your opinion that counts.

If you like Call of Juarez, more power to you. My all time favorite RPGs are Final Fantasy Tactics on PS1 (which I guess is a strategy RPG), Skies of Arcadia and Lost Odyssey on Xbox 360. But a million people could tell me why that's wrong. Why I should like Crono Trigger more or FInal Fantasy 6 more or whatever.

But why should I care? Sure, it's nice to see your favorite game get great scores, but at the end of the day, those scores come from people just like you and me who have their own opinions, and those opinions are in no way more valid simply because their job dictates that they write about it and put a score at the end. Anyone that weighs a games value based on what reviewers think, even 10, 20 or 100 reviewers is a moron and a follower that can't think for themself and relies solely on what others say.

And those people? Those people don't deserve my time and certainly not my justification for liking anything and that's just a fact.

LETS GET NAKED!!! seriously why is this still open

I think hes being a troll lol. If it was heres my problems with it, instead of this game everyone is playing/ the site/ forum its about SUX!! becaucse streef fighter is better (no explination)

thats trollin in my books

so let me get this straight, because a game didnt get quite as high a score as another game, its automatically trash? get a life, I love SF as well, but I dont go around preaching its superiority to MK...why like one and hate the other when you can enjoy both? let me know when SF can make a decent stage, game modes, an existant story etc only thing they have on mk is the fighting mechanics are a tiny bit better, but in every other way MK dominates SF

Very very appreciated Garalador/Baraka407 ;) and Mojo6 thnx .. For being older ?

Anyway, I am actually surprised that you guys look at it this way. I've always thought that fansites are too biased but you guys have seriously taken it mostly in a good way.

Thnx! :)

how bout we compare mk9 to mvc3 score on metacritic and gamerankings, mk wins both times on both consoles

Does it really matter what Metacritic says?

just askin.