So series like Street Fighter,Maden,CoD get excused on this?

[EXBadguy]

Why do games series like them get excused for releasing sequels that are same games with little to no change in general, yet all the other game sequels get flak for it? Like take Call of Duty Black Ops for example, it got praised for its "awesomeness" when all they added was a map and a extra gun, while bashing Raging Blast 2 for being the "same shit" as RB1. I don't get this shit AT ALL!

The reason why I ask this because this was one of the MAIN reasons why Namco Bandai ain't making any Tenkaichi games as of now or anymore.

[Silkman3003]

CoD constantly gets bashed for being more of the same, and is usually used as an example of franchises developers put up for easy money and to appeal to casuals ,while not caring about the quality aspect.

Atleast in most of the forums I read anyway. Probably in the reviews they get excused.

[EXBadguy]

CoD constantly gets bashed for being more of the same, and is usually used as an example of franchises developers put up for easy money and to appeal to casuals ,while not caring about the quality aspect.

Atleast in most of the forums I read anyway,

Yeah I see that too, but it still makes bookoo bucks. You saw how the last four CoD games sold right?

The question still remains. Why do other games series like Street Fighter don't get flak for being the same game in general for the last two or three decades? Why did all CoD and Street Fighter get all of that money?

[AgitoZ]

The difference being that something like Raging Blast just isn't as well produced as something as Street Fighter or CoD.

Now, I know a lot of people like to harp on something like CoD, but it's not the worst set of games out there. If people actually believe that, then they need to play some actual bad games. Even then, it's not like the franchise has its numbers slowly declining. It's true, they are still absurdly high, but it is slowly winding down.

Then there's something like the Street FIgher series, which so far have been updates to SFIV and not claiming to be flat out new games. Any updates to fighters by Capcom are at the very least cheaper than newer triple A games. And that also isn't even a guaranteed success, stuff like Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 didn't even sell what Capcom was expecting.

So if the DBZ were already of substantial quality and they didn't charge 60 bucks every year then maybe people wouldn't complain as much.

[EXBadguy]

Then there's something like the Street FIgher series, which so far have been updates to SFIV and not claiming to be flat out new games. Any updates to fighters by Capcom are at the very least cheaper than newer triple A games. And that also isn't even a guaranteed success, stuff like Ultimate Marvel Vs. Capcom 3 didn't even sell what Capcom was expecting.

So if the DBZ were already of substantial quality and they didn't charge 60 bucks every year then maybe people wouldn't complain as much.

This is not where I was getting at. I'm talking about "in general" and the Street Fighter sequel games in general ARE the same game with just little changes. As much as I love Street Fighter 4, it felt 90% like the same as Street Fighter 3. The only new worthy(IMO) thing they added were the Revenge Ultras, other than that, it's the same. Same punch, same Shun-Goku-Satsu, same Hadoken, same Shoryuken, 90% of it is the same. And I'm talking about the original Street Fighter 4. I could've said this back five years ago.

[TheGmGoken]

Why do games series like them get excused for releasing sequels that are same games with little to no change in general, yet all the other game sequels get flak for it? Like take Call of Duty Black Ops for example, it got praised for its "awesomeness" when all they added was a map and a extra gun, while bashing Raging Blast 2 for being the "same shit" as RB1. I don't get this shit AT ALL!

The reason why I ask this because this was one of the MAIN reasons why Namco Bandai ain't making any Tenkaichi games as of now or anymore.

Whoa take a chill pill. Not that series. COD does NOT get an excuse for this. Many bash it. Hell there a WHOLE videos about why COD Ghost sales dropped. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lcZ1Dg-XHlM. Many people who are gamers but at the same time just buy anything new and popular and praise it. Hell COD could make COD: DBZ edition and people will praise it cause it's NEW. Many people like new games. However people who are more into gaming always complain that in the old days up until Ps2 final days games used to get better as they went along(Sometimes got worse or equally as good) but most NEW gen consoles(This is PS3 and 360. Ps4 and One wasn't out at the time where it complains got big) sequels games was more of a DLC than a sequel. You can say this for COD.

This might come out wrong. But do you know how many times of MARIO games there are? There's enough variation so if the sequel is similar then you can play a different time of Mario game.Same with Sonic. Plus honestly Mario games do change. It's just they came the old school type of gameplay so you can't notice.

Not much of a Street Fighter fan so I would't know much about it. The deal is. A lot of people are into new things and praise them until the next new thing is out. Follow the crowd so to speak. But people are really deep into gaming understands that they're just DLC. Which means when it comes to DBZ which got a bunch of fans that LOVE it majorly. Begin to treat the game like they're deep into the games becoming sad when they is no changes(Some are acutally DEEP gamers). So NO series gets excuses. The majority just follows the crowd.While the deep gamers complain online like we are right now. Now some company you can tell try at least(Like Sly). Even if they fail give them credit that they tried.

Now I think I just most likely covered everything I can think of. Really nice subject to talk about. Anyways here is some examples.

The change from Budokai 1 to Budokai 2. There was a HUGE change. Changes from Rb1 to RB 2. Compared to it there wasn't that much of a train. You seem what I mean? People are used to having games get better as they go along. But as proven with the PS3,, 360, and Wii era fans will buy anything new even if the new thing can be EASILY be a DLC. Hell MW3 was worked on 2 weeks after MW2 was made. Look how that game turned out. The company see how the fans just get anything new with a popular Brand name. Even when it's nothing new at all. It's human nature. As said eariler. NO GAMES NEVER EVER got excused for this. The Majority of the people who might be gamers but not as deep(Or maybe they follow crowd) buy the game. As we the deep gamers, people who love a certain series, and just "smart" enough to notice that there is NO difference and that you're wasting your hard earn money....we just complain online on message boards while the company laugh at us, take 1% of our advice, or ignore us.

[Daimo-Rukiri]

I remember when SFII was released in multiple versions and many of us were waiting for street fighter 3, it did come but when the playstation and saturn rolled into town.
SF doesn't get excused, but you'll hear more COD bashing the SF.

[dbboxkaifan]

I'm currently playing Super Mario 3D World and it's a joy, it feels like the sequel to Mario 3D Land in HD which I loved so I couldn't resist it and bought it.

Pros:
- Flawless gameplay
- Superb graphics
- Great soundtrack
- Usual story (save the princess type)
- Insert the disc and play it right away without installing it!
- Green Coins are brought back from Mario Galaxy 2!

Cons:
- Forces the player to use the catsuit to get the Green Coins (I know the cover has the catsuit but wish it was completely optional)

So when people bash Mario games (platform, not its spin-offs) I'm not sure what exactly they're bitching about because they're near-perfect due to the reason that there's nothing to fix.

Anyway, same goes for Street Fighter, what they're just doing now to it is adding content and not trying to repair but as for Call of Duty? Oh that's going to be a goner.

[Quebaz]

This is not where I was getting at. I'm talking about "in general" and the Street Fighter sequel games in general ARE the same game with just little changes. As much as I love Street Fighter 4, it felt 90% like the same as Street Fighter 3. The only new worthy(IMO) thing they added were the Revenge Ultras, other than that, it's the same. Same punch, same Shun-Goku-Satsu, same Hadoken, same Shoryuken, 90% of it is the same. And I'm talking about the original Street Fighter 4. I could've said this back five years ago.

Hum, what? SFIV being the same as SF3 with little changes? What? Okay man, you can go ahead and say that King Of Fighters is the same as Street Fighter, because hey, they have the same input for attacks right?
(Also SF3 came in like 97 while SF4 came in 09).

[SparkyPantsMcGee]

People give Call of Duty shit every year for re-releasing the same game over and over. So I don't see where people are giving them a pass. I understand Street Fight, because the changes they make are on a deeper competitive level. It does get annoying to see a new Super Ultra Mega edition of Street Fighter IV but they do it for a reason; and it shows competitively. I'm trailing a bit, but that's why Street Fighter gets some slack.

Call of Duty gets slack because even if the gameplay is the same; the story mode is always different(not like that many people care). Not to mention, the multiplayer is one of the easiest things to jump into and chances are you have at least one friend who is playing the game at any point in time. That's something you can't do with any Dragonball game. I'll tell you right now, CoD won't survive this next generation but something will inevitably take it's place.

Dragonball, fits into none of these categories. For one thing the franchise is old as hell. In the US alone we're getting close to 15 years. There are Dragonball games spanning as far back as the NES. The story is finished and regardless of what game you play, you will be experiencing the same Radditz to Buu story. Hell sometimes it will be less; and very rarely will it be a little more. Like Street Fighter you'll see a lot of the same characters, but unlike Street Fighter, there isn't much of a difference with how each character plays. If you've played one character, you've played them all. People spend months, years even perfecting one character in Street Fighter. It will take you a few fights to figure out a character in Dragonball, and again they all play the same. Also as I eluded above, unlike CoD, it's really hard to find people to play with online. The servers aren't as good, and no one is playing. It's really hard to market a new Dragonball game because it's the same story. There isn't anything new to sell. Oh look, this game has Super Saiyan Goku...so does just about every Dragonball game ever.

[Dalesy]

Street Fighter is constantly evolving between iterations, and the meta-game is constantly evolving between versions. I don't think you could be any more wrong by saying that SF4 feels like Third Strike. Sure, they're both 2D fighters, but the character mechanics, frame data, and meta game are entirely different. SF4 is a very vortex based game. If you can get a single knockdown, you can do massive damage and win the round. Third Strike was not like this. Not to mention that super, EX, and Ultra combos all work differently.

CoD doesn't get excused at all. Its stagnancy is one of the biggest running jokes in the video game subculture.

Mario is a classic series that has a number of different styles that it alternates between. New games are done in the style of the 3D games, or the classic 2D platformers. Some have hub worlds like SMB3, some don't. There's actually a good deal of variety to expect from a new Mario release.

The reason DBZ gets it so bad is because they've kept producing the same style of game since 2005. Even when they try to diverge and change something, it stills feels overwhelmingly like the Sparking/Budokai Tenkaichi series. Not to mention that in terms of fighting games, the Sparking/BT series isn't very good. Its gameplay is simplistic, the characters are overwhelmingly similar, and there's really no reason to pursue the game as anything other than a casual game, which is a problem for a genre that is meant for 1v1 competition.

[ZeroAnnihilated]

=) I thought this would be a fun topic to comment on. Very nice...

First, I'll say that the factors that stand out in my mind are game-type variation and level of competition in the game's community. WITH THIS, I will also state that there are two types of the gamer mindset, those of the opened minded nature and those unwilling to accept change. Also, I will state that there is a wide range for competitive hunger in the gaming community, and for this reason, I will use the extremes for my examples: The Competitor vs the Adventurer.

When it comes to games like Mario, I'd like to go ahead and get that out of the way because the real issue lies in competitive players (which will be discussed with competitive games). While one CAN find competition in the Mario game franchise, it is mainly spawned from comparing "single player" records. Other than that, the Mario games are meant for quest completion. That being said, the player knows what to expect when getting a Mario game. A player that is expecting anything else than a Mario game WITH A MARIO GAME CONSTRUCT is going to be disappointed... however, who buys a Mario game with expectations that it will be anything other than the general expectation? Mario 64 was new due to the 3d environment, but surely every Mario fan knew what they'd be doing in that game: Collect coins, jump on bad guys, save the princess from Bowser. Now, if I were expecting the game to be like Starcraft, would you say I have a right to be complain? No, because the Nintendo franchise has done well with Mario placement.

As I have just discussed the adventure game expectation, I will go ahead and explain the Adventurer in regarding competitive games. I believe that a player should have a competitive edge in order to really enjoy a competitive game to its fullest. Therefore, I believe the Adventurer, who is not interested so much in the "depth" of a fighting game... but more towards the "experience" of the game is not to be trusted in the true value of a competitive game. While I completely understand that many players enjoy the DBZ games for the Dragon Ball "feel" or "experience", I believe their opinions when regarding the competitive nature of a DBZ game are invalid as they are always missing what counts. That being said, I will say that many complaints may fall from this category when regarding game-style repetition simply because they do not appreciate the same aspects of the competitive game that many other games do. These players do not wish to be champions, they do not wish to make a name for themselves in the competitive community, they simply want a fun experience. Repetition is not fun to the ever-changing appetite of the adventurer.

-Competitive games... I do enjoy these discussions.
When regarding competitive games, one must consider the level of competition in the community. The competitive community can only work with what material they are given, and it relates directly to how much games change vs how much they stay the same. Through this, I will explain the perspective of each mindset stated above.

1. The closed minded competitor: (Street Fighter style)
The closed minded player can always be found swimming in the foundation of any unchanging game. In other words, the closed minded competitor is the franchise's die hard player. THIS player has built his throne upon a heap of elitism. No matter what game you choose to search, you'll find this player. As everyone here has already expressed, there has not been any significant change in the Street Fighter series in terms of game-play construct. The street fighter games are of the traditional fighting style. The creators could reach Street Fighter #35 and this player will still be at ease with his community. If another player from another game (with any gaming construct, similar or other) came along to compare games, the closed minded competitor will argue that his game is better, and holds more depth. This is typically based on ignorance and pride, but what else does a closed minded player possess? He will point out any and all flaws that the other game may possess to further support his claim, even if he has to invent them himself. The ultimate message here, is that the closed minded player will never complain about the repetitive nature of the Street Fighter franchise because there: he is at home, far too afraid to venture outside.

2. The opened minded competitor: (General Fighter style)
The opened minded player can be found in the foundation of any game, regardless of any changes that have taken place. The opened minded competitor is not afraid of change. In fact, there are many cases in which he welcomes the change. Changes are perceived as opportunity to expand one's ability. Let us consider Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat. In the beginning, both games were constructed upon the same level of focal adhesion. As time passed, Street Fighter remained the same while Mortal Kombat decided to change it up. When Mortal Kombat 4 hit the scene, the side-step was introduced into the MK community. Then when Deadly Alliance came along, the combo system was changed up with styles and side-walk inclusion, introducing an even newer level of focal adhesion. The closed minded MK players disliked these changes and would make claims like "Mortal Kombat died after MK3". This is completely untrue, for many opened minded players welcomes the new style of Mortal Kombat (myself included) as it presented the opportunity to hone skills beyond that of the traditional fighter. In such a case, the opened minded player will not have complaints about any MK game, from the traditional style to the new.

THIS, in my opinion, resembles the competitive nature of Dragon Ball Z communities. As I stated above, one major factor is the game-type variation. The DBZ games have gone through so many changes, that one cannot even state the franchise as having any specific style. The Street Fighter game has its own style, the Super Smash Brothers games have their own style, etc. DBZ games have gone through different engines and have now created new sub communities. Guess what... these communities also have closed minded players as well as opened minded ones. From what I have seen, it pretty much works the same. The closed minded Budokai players do not like the changes made in creating the Tenkaichi series. The opened minded players embrace it. However, from what I have also read throughout the forums, it seems that the newer games like Ultimate Tenkaichi were structured toward the entertainment values for the Adventurer... but I have yet to play the Raging Blast series, so I can't pass judgement. Regardless, the closed minded DBZ player will not give credit to any other DBZ game. The closed minded Budokai player will say that the Tenkaichi series and Raging Blast series are all cloned games with no depth. This is due to their fear of change and unwillingness to discover the true value of the games. So in a sense, one would find it ironic that games that hold complaints on their tendency to repeat game-style construct are also the games that have gone through the most change. Think about it... (hypothetically), if the first game was of the Budokai style... and then every game after that was also of the Budokai style... there would be no complaints from the DBZ's competitive community (just like Street Fighter).

Call of Duty's only real competition that WOULD find reasons to complain stem from other gaming communities such as Halo... which also share the same excuse. So you won't hear much of it without immediate contradiction.

By the way, this was merely my quick response to the topic and I kinda got carried into my reasoning. If you find my words to be incorrect, it won't break my heart. Just thought you might enjoy the perspective. =)

[90sDBZ]

Well I agree that CoD games do get away with too much rehashing but Street Fighter actually does make major changes with each MAIN entry in the series. For example SF1 only allowed you to play as Ryu and Ken and you could take out your opponents in a single special move. SF2 revolutionised fighting games by adding several characters and balancing things out so that tournament play could be more exciting and competitive. It had several updated versions but those were mostly arcade exclusives. And it was mainly done to perfect the game for the hardcore players. SF3 introduced a mostly all new cast and introduced the famous parry system which gave us legendary moments like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lq1ey4-ewyQ

While SF3 was extremely popular with the tournament crowd it was a mainstream failure. Then we got SF4 which modernised the series. It was similar to SF2 except more combo heavy and more accessible to beginners at entry level.

And in all fairness Capcom do get a lot of hate for their various updates. Just go on youtube or a Street Fighter forum and you'll see nothing but hateful and sarcastic comments about the latest version. At the end of the day it keeps the game alive by keeping the Tournament players interested. DBZ games don't really have much of a competitive scene outside of B3 and IW which still don't hold a candle to the popular Street Fighter scene.

[Dalesy]

1. The closed minded competitor: (Street Fighter style)
The closed minded player can always be found swimming in the foundation of any unchanging game. In other words, the closed minded competitor is the franchise's die hard player. THIS player has built his throne upon a heap of elitism. No matter what game you choose to search, you'll find this player. As everyone here has already expressed, there has not been any significant change in the Street Fighter series in terms of game-play construct. The street fighter games are of the traditional fighting style. The creators could reach Street Fighter #35 and this player will still be at ease with his community. If another player from another game (with any gaming construct, similar or other) came along to compare games, the closed minded competitor will argue that his game is better, and holds more depth. This is typically based on ignorance and pride, but what else does a closed minded player possess? He will point out any and all flaws that the other game may possess to further support his claim, even if he has to invent them himself. The ultimate message here, is that the closed minded player will never complain about the repetitive nature of the Street Fighter franchise because there: he is at home, far too afraid to venture outside.

Again, I could not disagree more with the premise that Street Fighter iterations are similar to one another. Sure, Super Street Fighter IV and Super Street Fighter IV Arcade Edition are pretty similar. However, to say that SF4 is similar to SF3 is just...well, wrong. The systems are entirely different, and the meta game flows differently because of this. Even casual level of play of SF4 doesn't resemble that of SF3. To say that there is great similarity between the main Street Fighter titles because they are 2D fighters is like saying that Tekken and Soul Caliber are very similar because they are 3D fighters.

[ZeroAnnihilated]

Again, I could not disagree more with the premise that Street Fighter iterations are similar to one another. Sure, Super Street Fighter IV and Super Street Fighter IV Arcade Edition are pretty similar. However, to say that SF4 is similar to SF3 is just...well, wrong. The systems are entirely different, and the meta game flows differently because of this. Even casual level of play of SF4 doesn't resemble that of SF3. To say that there is great similarity between the main Street Fighter titles because they are 2D fighters is like saying that Tekken and Soul Caliber are very similar because they are 3D fighters.

I'm sure they do in fact have their differences, otherwise they would in fact be the exact same game. There are many forms of evolution in the gaming construct, so I will not argue with you. I am a competitive gamer at heart, but I'm not going to pretend I'm fully educated in the evolution of Street Fighter's depth. My main point was not to simply say Street Fighter is one dimensional, I merely suggested the differences of judging games when regarding closed minded players vs open minded ones.

[SparkyPantsMcGee]

Again, I could not disagree more with the premise that Street Fighter iterations are similar to one another. Sure, Super Street Fighter IV and Super Street Fighter IV Arcade Edition are pretty similar. However, to say that SF4 is similar to SF3 is just...well, wrong. The systems are entirely different, and the meta game flows differently because of this. Even casual level of play of SF4 doesn't resemble that of SF3. To say that there is great similarity between the main Street Fighter titles because they are 2D fighters is like saying that Tekken and Soul Caliber are very similar because they are 3D fighters.

I'm sure they do in fact have their differences, otherwise they would in fact be the exact same game. There are many forms of evolution in the gaming construct, so I will not argue with you. I am a competitive gamer at heart, but I'm not going to pretend I'm fully educated in the evolution of Street Fighter's depth. My main point was not to simply say Street Fighter is one dimensional, I merely suggested the differences of judging games when regarding closed minded players vs open minded ones.

I'm still having a hard time trying to define what a close minded competitive player is and how it relates to Street Fighter considering what you said about Street Fighter isn't exactly true. You compared the Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter players and their ability(or inability) to embrace change. You act like Street Fighter doesn't add change to their games or that players aren't willing to embrace that change. When in fact none of that is true. I can think of only one time the collective Street Fighter got into a shit fit and that was when Street Fighter EX came out. It was for good reason too, Not only did the 2D combo system not work well in a 3D environment, but the physics and fighting mechanics were terrible in comparison to the stronger 3D fighters out at the time(specifically Tekken or Street Fighter). Also this notion that you can jump in at Street Fighter 35 and feel at home is completely untrue. If you were to jump from Third Strike into SFIV, you'd probably get thrown around for awhile. Yes there are some things that carry over( Quarter Circle Turn+Punch still equals Haduken for Ryu) but EX counters, Timing, Ultras and Supers and all sorts of minor tweaks make the games really different. Hell jumping from Street Fighter IV into SFIV Arcade edition is going to be a bit off putting without some time and practice. But none of this can be applied to Dragonball anyway.

The Dragonball games offer nothing on the competitive level; at least not to the same degree. I know there are some really talented Budokai and Tenkaichi players but the skill level pairs in comparison to any other fighting game, be it Street Fighter, Mortal Kombat or Tekken. Also there is nothing new for the non hardcore fans to get into. For over 10 years, we've gotten the same experience story and character wise and only one major shift in gameplay style(Tenkaichi). The Budokai games did well because they were new; Budokai 1 was a gift from the gods for Dragonball fan outside of Japan. Tenkaichi changed styles and added a billion characters, but no game this gen has been able to offer something that we haven't already experienced since. Unlike any game OP mentioned, Dragoball doesn't really have that much room to evolve. The series is old and finished. Street Fighter can always add new fighters and tweak the gameplay, and Mario has always offered unique and dynamic experiences. Even CoD has room to shake things up...it won't, but it can.

[Hellspawn28]

COD is like the Transformers movies, they will make a shit ton of money despite how bad they are. Mario has shown to be proven fun despite that most Mario games have not changed that much.

Why did all CoD and Street Fighter get all of that money?

COD are more mainstream then DBZ, they are market to a wilder market and more people buy them. No one really buys DBZ games these days other the fans who still like the games. Most casual people stop caring for DBZ games after Budokai 3 and DBZ games have not been selling great after 2007. Namco Bandai don't market their games that much then they did in the past because these games don't sell very well and it cost a lot of money to market stuff. If you over market something and it bombs then the company loses a lot of money.

Also SF has been more popular then DBZ in the US long before DBZ was dubbed. SF2 was the most popular fighting game of the 90's and was very popular in arcades. Games like Mario, COD and SF are always going to be big money makers because they are more well known then DBZ. DBZ in the US is known as "That popular cartoon show from the 90's that died out years ago" to a lot of casual people. D

[EXBadguy]

Alright guys, I changed the topic title part from Mario to Madden, because I understand why Mario is popular, though I WISH they do something else than doing the same plot over and over again.

Street Fighter can always add new fighters and tweak the gameplay.

So can Dragonball. Just put in new characters and a new story, then we're good to go. Do something fresh like to catch the people's attention like they did with Ultimate Tenkaichi(though I somewhat thought the reason why it got a lot of attention was because of the name "Tenkaichi") make a Sagas style game, make a Super DBZ game sequel. It can be like Shin Budokai 2, or Dragon Ball Heroes, or heck, even Goku Jr's adventures. I for one wanna see the franchise or at least the Dragonball name live on for generations JUST like Street Fighter.

Mario and Ryu may be game icons, but Goku's a big anime icon. The problem is that people in the US don't care about anime much, that's why many anime including the DB series don't get attention nor respect.

Also SF has been more popular then DBZ in the US long before DBZ was dubbed. SF2 was the most popular fighting game of the 90's and was very popular in arcades. Games like Mario, COD and SF are always going to be big money makers because they are more well known then DBZ. DBZ in the US is known as "That popular cartoon show from the 90's that died out years ago" to a lot of casual people. D

While Street Fighter in the US is known as "That popular game series that gets physically milked over and over" to a lot of casual people too. Hence why Arcade Edition did bad and I doubt Ultra would do any better. Y'all can call me a white knight all ya want, but I'm calling them like I see them and Street Fighter 4 ain't that different from the rest from a casual standard. You see the same moves every time. I may love it, but I'm telling it like it is. I honestly don't know HOW it managed to get mainstreamed so much after it started in the 80s.

Anyway, let's talk about Madden and Fifa. Why are THEY getting a lot of money when they are rehashing the same damn thing?

[TheGmGoken]

Madden and Fifa make a lot of money from sports games because there are A LOT of sports fan out there. More than anime fans here. Also there is NEW players they want to play us. The stats are different. And they do change and add some stuff in there FYI. I know this cause my Cousin is a sport gamer lover.

[Quebaz]

While Street Fighter in the US is known as "That popular game series that gets physically milked over and over" to a lot of casual people too. Hence why Arcade Edition did bad and I doubt Ultra would do any better. Y'all can call me a white knight all ya want, but I'm calling them like I see them and Street Fighter 4 ain't that different from the rest from a casual standard. You see the same moves every time. I may love it, but I'm telling it like it is. I honestly don't know HOW it managed to get mainstreamed so much after it started in the 80s.

I don't what casual people you know, but must people I know,know the difference between the Street Fighter games and don't see them as "another sequel" (heck some of them even prefer some older versions). You're only seeing it now because of the way Capcom is treating the franchise.
Also, you see the same moves from who? The Ruy/Ken guys? The ocasional Guile? The SF3 cast has a lot of diferent moves from the cast in SF2.

Also, like Goken said, It's sports games, It will always have people buying them.