While you have a point (and I've given you a +1 vote because of it), the fact remains that the "average person" I know thinks that Street Fighter 4 animations were better than Street Fighter 3.
The Chun Li discussion happens a lot in my circle of friends, and I'm always in the minority. Very few people appreciate classic pixel art.
So, if we look to the digital art like Pixar, there are a lot of guidelines from traditional animation to make a scene come alive.
* Squish and Stretch
* Fallow through
* Secondary Action
These principles really help make dynamic scenes. If you look at the Chun Li animations, you can see that the older one does a better job of using these.
I feel like if the HD version took advantage of these, it would look the best out of all of them, but it failed to reach its full potential in it's medium.
I can't directly compare the SF3 and SF4 animations: they're just totally different art forms.
That said, as somebody who loves pixel art, I still really love what Capcom did with SF4's art style.
The artists of SF4 definitely took a bold direction; the SF4 games don't really look like any other 3D fighting games. The characters are cartoonish without falling back on the crutch of cel shading; they're realistic without looking like drab psuedo-photo-realism. To me they look like childrens' action figures, fighting it out on the screen.
As the author says, SF4 could have been animated better. Specifically it probably would have benefited from some squash-and-stretch as he suggests.
It's also worth noting that SF3's traditional cel animation, while awesome, also has room for improvement. The animation style isn't very consistent from character to character. In a lot of cases (Chun Li in particular) it's not even consistent between her various moves.
> The artists of SF4 definitely took a bold direction; the SF4 games don't really look like any other 3D fighting games. The characters are cartoonish without falling back on the crutch of cel shading; they're realistic without looking like drab psuedo-photo-realism. To me they look like childrens' action figures, fighting it out on the screen.
Actually, Arc System Works ironically was the one who pushed the envelope here.
SF4 took a huge number of cues from Battle Fantasia. The "Super-Attack Zoom-in" animation, the dynamic camera movement, "Super Freeze", and so forth.
Its ironic, because Arc System Works made Battle Fantasia as a "learning project". In various interviews, Arc System Works noted that they had very little 3D skill and needed to train everyone up on 3D Animation skills, and the best way to do that was to make a 3D-animated video game.
Then a few years later, Capcom basically takes all the cues from Battle Fantasia and added a decent-style on top of it (the "Black Lines" and a unique style of cel-shading). And of course, Capcom's SF4 cast was much larger, more detailed animation and all that. Nonetheless, it is clear that it was Arc System Works that pushed the envelope in their experiments with the one-off Battle Fantasia.
IMO, Arc System Works has done 3D a massive favor here with Battle Fantasia, and they are once again pushing the envelope with Guilty Gear Xrd.
Not to hate on SF4's style of course. I think I prefer Capcom's SF4 style over say... Tekken, DOA or even MvC3. And Capcom definite added a lot of "love" in the art-style. But the _core_ of the animation techniques were more or less copied from Battle Fantasia years earlier.
Super Smash Bros always had the right idea with the attacks however. If you watch SSB:M carefully, the bones of the various characters expand with the hitboxes. For example, Mario's FAir attack has a huge exaggerated fist, and other characters shrink/ grow with their hitboxes. (Which adds for some interesting strategies / counter-strategies, since hitbox / hurtbox manipulation is a major element of high-level Fighting Games).
The Super Smash Brothers series has been the best at communicating the hurtboxes and hitboxes in a 3D environment. And it looks like Guilty Gear Xrd is finally a 2nd series that finally communicates those important cues as well.
----------------------------
Still, it is clear that the 3D Artwork style of SF4 is still relatively new and isn't as a refined of artwork. Again, the Chun-Li animation from SF3 is near the peak of Capcom's animation prowess, while SF4 is probably better described as a great first step for Capcom (even if it is in many ways copied over from Battle Fantasia).
Despite that fact, people are wow'ed by the the zooms, the buttery smooth animations, dynamic camera angles and automated shading. Things that honestly didn't take much effort on the part of SF4 artists. Heck, all of those things basically come for free when you use 3D Models.
I wasn't impressed with Battle Fantasia's animation at all. I thought it was kind of poor, actually, compared to other 360/PS3 efforts like the Soul Calibur games of the day. That's not to say you're wrong; we just had very different impressions of it. What animation techniques are you referring to when you talk about Battle Fantasia's innovations? (I'm not an animator; I'm surely missing some things there)
Again, Battle Fantasia was a learning project for Arc System Works. It was never meant to be an advanced artform. Which is why it is deeply ironic that almost all modern 2D fighting games using 3d art are based on Battle Fantasia camera mechanics.
Compare the super-attack animations between SF4 and Battle Fantasia. And note the following similarities:
1. The 'Super Zoom' that changes the camera angle, to focus on the character performing the super-attack.
2. The 'freeze frame' mechanics: which "pause" all other 3D animations while the super-attack user remains fully animated.
3. The way the background melts into a new environment, and then melts back into the stage as the super-attack either hits the opponent... or misses.
True, SF4 has better character models, better backgrounds, and better animations. But the camera mechanics were all invented and pioneered by Battle Fantasia.
Hasn't the zoom thing been around forever? It goes back at least as far as Rival School and probably earlier games I can't remember - I think Soul Edge did it too?
Rival Schools also changed the background during supers/knockouts, although it was just "fade to blacks" and 2D overlays rather than a new environment. But looking at this video of Battle Fantasia supers (been so long since I played it!) that's all that game did as well:
The "freeze other animations while the super move executes" thing is such a minor stylistic thing that I'm having trouble really thinking of it as an innovation and to boot... is that even what Battle Fantasia does? I mean look at this super: the steam in the background is still animating:
John Kricfalusi always laughs at and criticizes Pixar animation. Mainly because he's a hipster (even looks and dresses the part) who wants to go back to the good ole days of Bob Clampett, Chuck Jones, Tex Avery, etc. For most Pixar or other 3D animated productions, there just isn't enough squash and stretch or exaggeration to appeal to old time animation enthusiasts.
I think it's possible though. It's been done to a limited extent in video games: note how Link's sword arm and sword grow when he takes a swing in Wind Waker.
That's fair, but if you want to make art, there's no sense in trying to appeal to everyone. The guy that disregards pixel art probably wouldn't see your traditional art for what it really is, either. You can be depressed that the "mainstream" doesn't appreciate what you do, you can crush your spirit trying to pander to them, or you can have fun in your cozy niche with a small handful of fans and peers that really get you.
The Chun Li discussion happens a lot in my circle of friends, and I'm always in the minority. Very few people appreciate classic pixel art.