'Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers' Review: Priced More Than It Should Be?
The fighting game "Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" was just released for the Nintendo Switch on Friday. While comments on its gameplay and total package vary, well-known publications agree about its price tag.
It is important to note that "Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" is not an entirely new release since it was developed as a modernized version of "Super Street Fighter II" that was made available in 1994.
While the game brings back the familiar pixel animation, it also offers a new high-definition appearance. Capcom also made an effort to pack "Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" with new game modes while rebalancing the gameplay.
"Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" also comes with two new characters - Evil Ryu and Violent Ken.
For Polygon's reviews editor Arthur Gies and one of the self-proclaimed "longest-term Street Fighter fans" within the publication, "Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" is a "weak version" of the arcade game despite the upgrades it is advertised to have.
On the other hand, another avid "Street Fighter" fan within Polygon, managing editor Mike McWhertor, pointed out, "It's also hard not to bring up the price of Ultra Street Fighter 2 from the get-go."
"Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" costs $39.99. While it is true that there are other games which cost much higher than the said price, it looks like reviewers could not overlook those numbers even when considering the game's content.
Eurogamer's news editor Wesley Yin-Poole also brought the pricing issue to the spotlight in his early review of "Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers." Yin-Poole said the game's price (£35 in the region) is a "rip-off" for "a b********** version of Super Street Fighter 2 Turbo." He also noted that the 1994 fighting game was probably one of the best in the said genre.
On the other hand, "Ultra Street Fighter II: The Final Challengers" has gotten some good words from other publications as well. However, it was not enough to bring up its underwhelming 67 score from critics' review on the aggregator site Metacritic.