Hello friends, happy humpday! I hope your week is going well. I'm sure you are all eager to hear about new developments at the Tokyo Game Show. One bomb was already dropped by Famitsu magazine this week. They published that Sakura is officially in the console version of Street Fighter IV. This is good news for fans of the character and another stab in my side.

This is where I have to be absolutely clear. I am not against seeing returning characters in a Street Fighter game. I am against the direction that Street Fighter IV is taking because it breaks from the conventions established in previous Street Fighter games as well as introduces nonsensical characters and abilities into canon.

The previous numbered Street Fighter games followed a set order and had the following things going for them:

1. Ken and Ryu were the main characters.

2. They, and the rest of the universe, grew and matured in every game.

3. Previous fighters were "retired" and new fighters and styles were introduced in every game to round out the cast.

4. Returning characters were used sparingly and only to appease the fanbase in eventual upgrades. Street Fighter IV has a lot more in common with Street Fighter Alpha / Zero and even EX than it does with Street Fighters I through III.

Apologies to Mr. Ono but this game is not so much an homage to SF II, or trying to recapture the spirit of the title as it is plain and simple fanservice.

1. Street Fighter IV is set between games II and III.

2. It features the entire cast from the original SF II plus characters from Alpha.

3. The characters from previous games, in canon and chronology, are not getting older.

It should be obvious that the characters in SF have grown up through the series. The way Ryu is presented in SF Zero is noticeably different than the way he is in SF III. He is taller, more muscular and his features more defined. This was obvious not only in the official art but in the sprites themselves. My concern is that Mr. Ono, his team or the people at Capcom and DIMPS are simply ignoring these conventions for the sake of appeasing fans.

People would assume that the same would be true for Cammy, the soldier who was a young girl in SF II, yet she doesn't look any older in different versions of the game. However Cammy has actually matured in the game and in canon. Her design changes are subtle but they are there. She is a girl in SF Zero 3, a Shadowlaw DOLL agent with a schoolgirl necktie and army hat. She is a young woman in Delta Red camouflage and a beret by the time SF II takes place. She is perhaps a year younger than Sakura in canon but has actually shown some changes in the series.

Mr. Ono and his team did not have to stick so close to the "script" and recreate the classic characters line-for-line for fear of alienating the fanbase. Fans would have been happy to see Sakura return to the series with some minor cosmetic changes. They would have understood that some time has passed since SF Zero and would have welcomed her as a more experienced fighter. SF IV is heavy with fanservice and light on evolution.

Mr. Ono approached this game as way to recapture the golden years of the series and make IV in tune with the runaway success of SF II. At the least to be a "gateway drug" into the fighting genre and at the most to be the title that his competitors will copy from. The emphasis on fanservice means good things for the bottom line, it will appease fans that have fond memories of SF II and it will sell units. The one thing that fanservice does not guarantee is evolution. Evolution is critical for the success of the fighting genre. Lack of evolution has sunk many a franchise. Mortal Kombat anyone?

Where does Street Fighter go from here? Will SF V be nothing more than a 3D version of SF III? Will SF VI go further back in time and retcon the events from the original Street Fighter to SF Zero? Appeasing fans by giving them the same characters and story time and again will wear thin on the franchise. As much as gamers enjoy a certain title and wants to know what happens next they are hyper-critical of getting exactly that. Street Fighter has to break convention while remaining true to its roots. It sounds like a paradox but was actually pulled off in 4 games. SF through SF III and SF Zero. Street Fighter IV failed to push the genre forward and instead recreated SF II in it's own image. This is by all accounts de-evolution.

What do you think?