Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat
 

What is the absolute best gaming franchise? Or at least between these two.

I say Mortal Kombat. 90% of the Street Fighter games are the same thing. MK at least changes the fighting style completly from the old games and its a rpg game now too where as everytime a new Street Fighter game comes out the game is exactly the same compared the to last one. Just it will have some new characters.

I'd pick Mortal Kombat, unless you add the crappy 3D games into the equation. But as for old school, 2D Mortal Kombat, I would definitely say it's better than Street Fighter, though I still like playing that series as well.

It's true, but I don't think that makes Mortal Kombat better for having failed in one area and needing to branch out into others. That is why they changed the format, you know, because the straight up fighters weren't selling, and they didn't want to just abandon the franchise.

Street Fighter is pretty much the same in terms of the barest basics, but mechanics change from game to game, so playing SFIII ryu you might understand the moves from having played him before, but that doesn't mean you'd be able to use him well.

Plus I think Street Fighter has the advantage for having stayed in 2d (with the exception of EX), and for having a much more fluid fighting system. Any time I played MK, I always felt like hit detection and combos in general were kind of a crapshoot. Given, the last Mortal Kombat game I played was on N64, but after that I just didn't feel like it was worth my time.

What's cheaper, E. Honda's 1,000 Hand Slap spam, or Liu Kang high/low fireball spam!

Mortal Kombat was great through 3. After that, it really wasn't worth paying attention to anymore. But, I guess, many would say that Street Fighter wasn't worth playing after the various versions of 2.

I think, in general, I've logged more hours on the MK games, simply because of all the absurdities (mastering everyone's 'Friendship,' for exampe).

I myself like Street Fighter better. I've always been a sucker for move depth and precision which is why I love SF and Tekken 5 (not 1,2,3 or 4). While I still love MK for that little thing called FUN, I'll always go back to SF when I want a solid match.

The thing that's always bugged me the most is that the only combos in MK are the ones that the developers pre-program for you to remember. Where games like SF, Guilty Gear, or Tekken 5 allow you to use the standard combos, but because each move decently flows with one another outside of the programmed combos, it allows you to essentially "build your own combo" which makes it feel more like your character has controll over themselves instead of only being able to do 3 to 5 combos that were programmed into the game by some other guy.

*This post has not been spell checked*

It seems you have played SF II 'HF on XBL. :lolsign:
As for which I prefer, it depends which SF you match it up against. Each fighter had bad game every now and then but if you take say the best SF against MKII, then I would clearly have to say MKII. That was the last decent MK title of the series before going into the insanity of combos. What made it even worse was when it went 3-D. :doh:

I wasn't aware there was any comparison between the two. Mortal Kombat certainly has the novelty factor going for it, but it's always been just an imitation of Street Fighter without a lot of careful thought into what made the gameplay so good. Not that Street Fighter is always perfect, but it gets a heck of a lot more right consistently than MK ever did.

Let's face it; you weren't there for the complex fighting system, you were there because when you win you get to rip the guy's heart out with your bare hands. And while that's a hell of a lot of fun, by no stretch of the imagination are the MK series better games than SF.

I'm not sure why the older MK games are any fun. They seem extraordinarily clumsy in comparison to the newer 3D ones. The only Street Fighter I've really played is Street Fighter II, and that feels very clumsy as well. I won't vote, but so far I enjoy MK more. And I'm very very bad at pulling off fatalities, so it's not because of that. I just think switching between fighting styles and the style branching combos and all that is pretty cool.

I vote for Killer Instinct.

Street Fighter, i like MKII a lot, but Street Fighter II is a pure and absolutely tecnical game... and even get tournaments. And what can i say about those games now: Street Fighter III 3rd Strike and Mortal Kombat Deception are absolutely impossible to compare.

Best gaming franchise between the two, easily Street Fighter.

I always thought MK had peaked at two. I think both kept a decent set of characters (in comparison to the absolute nobodies of Tekken). Anyone remember Sub Zero Mythologies?

I admit I sucked at MK in general, even at low difficulty it just seemed like a hell of a lot of effort to get to 'not too bad'.

I'm probably more familiar with SF. SF Alpha III had that cool World Tour mode. Looking past it, you've the likes of Puzzle Fighter (Awesome) and Pocket Fighter (Neat).

Yeah, I liked Killer Instinct and KI: Gold a lot.

I voted SF... probably because I play fighting games more competively than anyone on this board. I normally look for how tournament worthy games are... and the MK games don't fall into this category. Fun, yes (ignoring the later installments with two button infinites and the like), but not really tournament worthy. There isn't much of a community for the MK scene, which says a lot. SF has stood the test of time (so far) as far as being competitive, which, in my eyes, makes it a superior series. No game is perfect, but I feel like SF comes out on top.

id vote on a draw.

the street fighter series have had its share of gloriful moments, it was on the top at the SNES era.

mortal kombat however has more shitload of gore and crazy fatalities.

id doesnt matter if the street fighter series doesnt change drastically in gameplay and also in the graphics but what revolution it stirred up in the past was really huge compared to what impression mortal kombat made at that time.

both are awesome franchises in my point of view.
ive been a fan of them both when i was a kid and i am still a fan EQUALLY of them both.:biggrin:

Street Fighter is the _much_ stronger franchise.
It also has the better games.

Not to say that the Mortal Kombat franchise is a bad one.
To make a movie analogy, where Street Fighter is the Hollywood blockbuster, Mortal Kombat is the back-row splatter movie (with all the ups and downs that come with it though, cultish followers included).

He's definitely right. They are just so very different and are both good in their own respective ways.

I'm probably a bigger fan of Mortal Kombat though, as I've been playing them ever since I first saw the first MK hit the arcades. As for Street Fighter, I never really enjoyed them until the first Alpha.

It's also interesting that MK's stock has been on a steady rise since Deadly Alliance, while Street Fighter has been on a slow decline for some time now. Though the new XBLA game seems to have renewed interest in many.

I handed over many hours to MKII at the arcades, it was an absolute riot. Being able to win matches simply by doing the trip move over and over, ten seconds of "HWAH, HWAH, HWAH" and ultimate victory complete with someone next to you frowning because they'd just wasted $2.

I'm not really a fan of either, though. I'd probably have to go with the Street Fighter games though, the characters and music were cooler. E.Honda makes obscure snorting noises as he somehow flies across the screen, that's a winner. Is he even in the SF games anymore? Last one I played had all these boring new goons in it. :(

I vote KOF! Sorry, but I HATE Capcom, and what they do to fighting games. All Capcom games that aren't Rival Schools/ Project Justice suck IMO. Let's look at Capcom vs SNK 2. Capcom had to dumb down all the SNK characters because they made their characters look bad. (Why the hell even bother make King do the backflip for Illusion Dance, if she doesn't even get the invulnerability frame for it?) Not to mention, Capcom made air blocking which I strongly do not approve of.

Mortal Kombat is not really much of a comparison. It's fun, but that's about it, and that's really all that should matter sometimes...

Totally agreed manny. Capcom is very bad away from Rival Schools, which is innovative. All street fighter is is a bunch of Ryu clones, and when they're not get this : they're KEN clones, who's already a ryu clone. Not enough cloning variety? Clone the evil ! CLone Akuma ! Who's just a Ken clone with one more move !! WOW.>!! Evil RYU FTW !.. not...

I pick Mortal Kombat simply because at least, they try to innovate from game to game with the 3d fighting engine. Of course, they still havent topped Mortal Kombat 2 because making a good engine for 3d fighting game is tougher than for a 2d fighting game. But I feel that if they haste the pace of the fight a little bit and work on the engine in general, Mortal Kombat Armageddon could very well play like a 3d version on UMK 3, which i'm definately looking forward too.

Mortal Kombat is trash. It was fun back in the day, but it hasn't aged well at all (in serious competition, at least). I realize that both sides can say the same thing, but I imagine these stands are made through casual play. MK feels sloppy when I play it. Rapid-punch to uppercut repeat. With Street Fighter and even Guilty Gear I feel like I have much more control over the characters. The gameplay is tighter, responsive, and fluid. In Mortal Kombat, it feels as though you can do the same combos over and over again no matter WHAT skill level you are and still succeed.

The characters also look like butt. Boring designs combined with crappy 3D models make for limp biscuits. I'd rather stare at Chun-Li's thunder thighs in glorious 2D.

There wouldn't Be, a [Mortal Kombat/King of Fighters] if there wasn't a street fighter II =p.

BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH "RELEVANCE OF QCF MOTION!" BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH "BROUGHT BACK ARCADES" BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH "EVO 2k" BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH "YIE AR KUNGFU DID NOT STANDRRDIZZE HLTH BARZ!" BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH......

Mortal Kombat ftw.:edgarrock:
I'm horribly biased since I essentially grew up with MK,but bear with me here. There is simply no other fighting game like MK. Boon and Tobias had the balls to do something unique and different,and that's what they stuck to ever since. MK just has that refreshing vibe to it that you just can't confuse with anything. And right now,it's pretty much the only non-Japanese fighting game on the market. Say what you want about the gameplay,but in terms of storyline,design and overall atmosphere the Mortal Kombat series beats the everloving fuck out of pretty much every Japanese fighting game out there (the only possible exception being the SNK games). Hell,in this aspect,the MK universe wipes the floor with many modern (J)RPGs,and that's saying something.

*awaits patiently for the "OLOLO U FUCKIN NOOB FGHTING GAMEZ DON'T NEED NO STROILYNES OMGLOLZ"*

As for Street Fighter,Capcom at this point has pretty much run the series into the ground. I (begrudgingly =P) admit that it's a beautiful and delicately balanced classic,but that's no excuse to release 20 different versions of the same fucking game. But then again,it is Capcom we're talking about here... -_-

Street Fighter all the way. Putting aside the graphics comparison and stuff, Street Fighter (the first one) is a seminal fighter title and has influenced more games than MK.

Also, Mortal Kombat has way more clon characters than SF.

If you want to get technical,the very first Street Fighter game (Fighting Street) didn't really inspire anything,since it was a piece of shit. =P Street Fighter II,on the other hand,single-handedly fathered the genre,there's no doubt about that.
Not anymore. Since MK4,the characters who used to be palette swaps were all redesigned to make them look unique. SF,on the other hand,still has at least five characters who reuse the same set of sprites - Ryu,Ken,Akuma,Dan and Sean. -_-

Not to mention similarity of moves. You don't need Ryu, Ken, Dan, and Sean. Just keep Akuma as he's stronger than all of them and have thier moves with modified damage and range >_>, not to mention he has a bunch of forms, Shin Akuma, Shin Akuma(Capcom vs SNK2 and this form is THE best), Cyborg akuma(MVC X-Men vs SF). Mortal Kombat gets the one up from me for having fatalities ;p.

The first Street Fighter games which were released were always my favourite even after the Mortal Kombat games had been released. While the characters from MK had very creative moves (Scropion being my favourite) I found SF to be alot quicker in terms of game play and for a ultra-lucky-button-bashing fiend like me, that's a great for winning games against my friends. Guy was my favourite character from the SF series when he became playable in one of the games (think it was SF Alpha 3).

I grew up playing both, but Street Fighter II takes the cake for me. They just have very recognizable characters that have stuck around for such a long time and are synonymous with fighting Anime, much like Fatal Fury. In most cases, I believe that Ryu's hadoken is more popular than Liu Kang's fireball. Mortal Kombat just has mindless blood with every hit. It just goes over the top sometimes. As cool as the fatalities are and as cool as Smoke and Sub-Zero are, Street Fighter also spawned collaborations with Marvel and I'm a big fan of Marvel. Then there's the Street Fighter Alpha series, which is my absolute favourite of the Street Fighter franchise. Akuma fuckin' kicks ass.

Actually, that's not true. Take a peek at SF3 (which should've arrived at or around the same time MK4 did). New sprites for the Shotokan bitches, along with every character. Learn2bash.

Street Fighter has stood the test of time. Mortal Kombat can still be a bit of fun so long as you don't take it seriously, though.

Is this even a contest? SF is so much better. It has tons more depth. My opinion is summarized in the following two quotes:

Also, Havoc has apparently never played Street Fighter.

Double Post:
Also, in SF3: Ken > Akuma > Ryu >>>>> Sean

You really think so? The recent Street Fighter games that I have played have been average at best, nothing with the depth of the Soul Calibur series.

To answer the thread, I prefer the Street Fighter series although I did very much like the darker gorier side to MK as an alternative. I found the music to be much more memorable in the Street Fighter series.

Street Fighter, no contest.

Mortal Kombat was a mere distraction at best.

Should be fixed to say this:

Soul Calibur is nowhere close to being as deep (or balanced) as the GG series, especially with SC3.

Either way, I prefer the SF series to MK since SF was much more polished compared to watching some player at an arcade juggle his opponent to death in an MK game. It's almost as though the game didn't go through a significant amount of testing for them to fail to catch that. All MK really had going for it was the gore and fatality factors; its actual gameplay was pretty crappy.

I think, in general, I've logged more hours on the MK games, simply because of all the absurdities (mastering everyone's 'Friendship,' for exampe).

Hmm thats a tough one, SF was my first fighter but MK was the bloodiest, goriest, fighter that I ever played. I think I am gonna go for MK just because the story line for it was greater then SF for me.

Exactly what I thought. MK gave itself bad rep when making the games just for aiming to new heights of excessive gore. I'd like to point out that (hard to believe) the Street Fighter movie was decent.....at least in comparison to the Mortal Kombat movie. Silly developers....cannot spell "combat" properly. :p

Statements like "Every Street Fighter game is the same" or "lol 890432 different versions of the same game" make me cringe, as they are always made by people with no understanding of fighting games.

For example, the Street Fighter II series and Street Fighter III series are WORLDS apart. They do not play the same AT ALL. It's ludicrous to think they're the same. The game engines and mechanics are completely different.

Street Fighter is a franchise for the hardcore - casual fighting game players and button mashers aren't going to appreciate the subtle changes to the game's balance through the various updates. It's like how Blizzard consistently patches Starcraft or Warcraft in order to address imbalances, bugs, and other issues in the game, years after their release. Obviously since console and arcade games can't be patched as simply as PC titles, they chose to release new games with refinements and updates. Hardcore fans typically are glad to eat these up. I would argue that no other genre is as sensitive to game balance issues and "patching" as fighting games are. A seemingly minor change can change the balance tremendously.

Although I sucked at SF, I always liked it.

At the time, MK was the shit. But really, looking back its really just a pos. Them having to constantly remake the game, as opposed to just modifying and tweaking the engine said alot to me as well. SF is easily the superior of the two. Looking back, MK also looks extremely bad in its mix of animation and realism.

Samurai Showdown was actually my fave of them all, but it was a bit rarer.

Soul Caliber, Guilty Gear, and Tekken are the fighting games I play now. But I still like SF, and the SNK games; even though I somehow lack any ability at those series.

street fighter is better,and finally i find someone that as guy as is favorite character,i thought i was the only one

street fighter i like em both but street fighter has better characters also 1 other thing KEN RULES!!!!!

I don't think we should even bother comparing these two games. If I went into an arcade and had to choose to spend my only 2 quarters on Street Fighter or Mortal Kombat, you can be sure I will play Street Fighter.

Street Fighter!!!
I enjoyed mk1, like mk2 a lot and spend a lot of time killing my fds, but ever since mk3, i lost interest. i can't really explain why. i think it's because most doesn't look as good as they used to in mk2.

i only like sf2, sfa and sf3 series though. don't like all those crossovers and 3d stuff. i'm already looking forward for sf4 :) it better be 2d, in hd resolution and have a remixed version of sf2 music.

It's not just Street Fighter that's on the decline, it's Capcom fighting games period. After they crapped out Capcom Fighting Evolution and it bombed because it was nothing more then recycled sprites slapped in yet another game with no plotline as to why whatsoever, they pretty much abandoned their fighting franchises aside from repackaging old games (Darkstalkers for PSP and Alpha Anthology anyone?). I honestly don't know what they were thinking with Fighting Evolution, if you want a game that just has random characters from past games thrown into it who in their right mind would choose that small number of characters instead of Marvel vs Capcom 2 or Capcom vs SNK 2?

Years ago I would have said Street Fighter to this question, but seeing as how the Street Fighter series is pretty much staying where it is rather then releasing anything new. I'd have to say Mortal Kombat. The newer Mortal Kombat games may be no Soul Calibur 3 or Tekken, but they're not supposed to be. And if they were like Soul Calibur 3 or Tekken everyone would bash them for copying off someone else just like they do all the GTA clones.

This is my opinion
 

I agree. Street Fighter is a more technical fighter and I've played it since I was a child. Mortal Kombat was a fair amount of fun however all the mechanics are totally laggy and the stroyline is truly weak. If you look at these scenarios SF comes out on top.

Street Fighter vs Mortal Kombat- MK (SF 1 is...well..it's SF 1)

Street Fighter II vs MK II- Street Fighter II not saying MK II is bad it's just SF II is the father of all fighters.

Street Fighter Alpha 2 vs Mortal Kombat 3- I'm sorry but MK 3 is pure garbage! I'd pick Guy over Stryker any day.

Street Fighter Alpha 3 vs Ultimate Mortal Kombat 3- The only redeeming factor in UMK 3 is the roster and it's mostly ninja color swaps while SFA 3 has the best roster of all the SF's and is seen as one of the best SF's

Street Fighter EX vs Mortal Kombat 4- Uh...

Cannon Spike vs MK Special Forces- I'd say Cannon Spike for the win! Cammy in rollerblades. drool...(However, it a broader scale...both games suck.)

Street Fighter III Double Impact vs Mortal Kombat Gold- Double Impact wins. 2 games in one and you get to see all that cool SF III New Generation and W-Impact art. MK Gold is just a port of MK 4 with Baraka in it.

Street Fighter EX 3 vs Mortal Kombat Deadly Alliance- Uh...

Street Fighter III Third Strike vs. Mortal Kombat Deception- Hard to compare the two, they are both really good just Street Fighter III 3S is a 2D game which has the control and the feel of a 3D game. It gives a broader experience on 2D gaming what with parrying and such (e.g. Daigo Umehara) and how the scales can be tipped with skill and timing. Deception has good visuals but lacks substance to it. The controls are clunky and remind me of Virtua Fighter at moments. I own both but I prefer 3S.

Mortal Kombat Armageddon vs Nothing- No SF4 as of yet to compare and MKA is a really good game. I made Shin Gouki with the character creation so even without a game to compare to I still pick SF over MK.

Sorry to go on for so long but that's my long ass opinion. heh. sorry.:)

What the...?

You can't really up and up compare them like you just did. The difference in release years between many of those (Street Fighter 1 and the first Mortal Kombat, for example) is rather sizable. A better comparison would be The World Warriors versus MK1, or something. And Super Street Fighter II versus MKII. Some of these make no sense whatsoever.

The topic title completly sounds like one of those eternal fanboy battles trying to kick off.

I'll always prefer streetfighter for the gameplay alone, mortal kombat was more a gimmicks based game (lolz bloooood...) and the style of fighting was to say the least dirty as hell although I guess that appealed to a large amount of people. MK's Good for a laugh but not much more although i haven't played the newest games. Anyone who's played lu kang vs raiden and keeps spamming a certain pair of moves will know what I mean about good laugh... :D

I don't like Mortal Kombat very much. The characters are often cool, the backdrops are interesting, and the voice samples are excellent. The overal style is excellent. The gimicks - and they are gimicks, nothing more - are entertaining at least. Fatalities, and various other -alities are fun, but they don't contribute much the gameplay.

Then there's the balance. Or rather... there the balance is NOT. You all know what I'm talking 'bout. It's not that the character's movesets aren't intersting, it's that there's not enough thought given to the tactical side of the game. As was said already in this thread, there's just not enough variation, and not enough depth.

Street Fighter is a very complex game. You can win with any character against a player or against the computer, if you have the skills. No character has an outrageous advantage, most of the time. Obviously that's the ideal, but not all the games in the series have been perfect.

What differentates the two? In SFII and sucessors, pretty much every move you can make has a countermove. Given sufficient skill, and an infinite timelimit, two players could potentially fight for hours. That rarely happens of course, because one player will have a flash of brilliance that the other didn't anticipate, and break through his defences before long.

I'm not a great player of either franchise. I'm just average, or even below. I felt I should state that before anyone gets the idea that I'm any kind of a master of the genre. I've seen them play, and I've been schooled by them a time or two, but I'm no master myself.

Street Fighter all the way. Mortal Kombat never appealed to me, but then I've only played it a few times. I still find myself playing on Street Fighter II these days. I actually prefer it over some of the newer beat-em-ups that have been released in recent years.

I guess the main reasons for me preferring Street Fighter over Mortal Kombat was the fact that Street Fighter II looked better than Mortal Kombat. (Fogive me if I'm wrong but I'm going off memories that are more than 10 years old, and I've played a lot of games since then), and it also had better characters than Mortal Kombat.

Street Fighter!!!
I played MK and for me it was like some exaggerated concept to add ..excessive blood, besides in the first few games all characters played the same, I mean, the same animations for all boy and the same for all girls, the only diference was the special moves.

When someone says fighting game, the first thing that comes is SF (at least for me), I hope Capcome releases SF4, because SF3 was awesome!

And SF has Chun-li :P and Akuma

KoF. Lol, KoF owns both.

lol there's always one... not that I have anything against kof I mean look who I have for an avatar Terry frecking Bogard! Should we add kof to the poll now due to Taegueki's flawless 5 word arguement? :D

Street Fighter. Don't get me wrong, MK is good, I enjoy it. But SF for me is the better one in terms (as Skex said) "fluidity". And it has the best 2D fighting games out there. 2D fighting games is win.

Personally, I got more hooked on Street Fighter than with Mortal Kombat. It might be in part that my parents wouldn't let me play MK because of the blood and gore, and that street fighter was more cartoony and ok...

I got especially hooked on Street Fighter II Turbo for SNES. It was a fun game to play. I never got hooked to MK when I started playing it. One of my friends however, loved it to pieces.

the mortal kombat gameplay is crappy as hell. and they make very stupid chars like zombie liu kang. how the hell can a zombie fights and say waachaaa woooooo!?!? the endings suks! the only thing good so far is the konquest mode. which means streetfigher tops it completly. if capcom makes another streetfighter game it'll flush mortal kombat down the drain

Additional Spam:
another thing mk have too many clones. first start sub-zero and young bro sub zero. then sub zero and noob saibot. then scorpion and rain. then rain and ermac. then kitana and mileena. mileena and jade. then jade and tanya. then sub zero and frost. then smoke and human smoke. then smoke and cyrax. then cyrax and sektor. and plus another crappy zombie char havik. he is the most retard creation ever. his neck break move dont even hurt the opponent. then his fatality. he rips his own head off. and scares the opponent to death. wtf is that! plus the bosses are easy as hell. come on onaga and blaze. they are crap. all u have to do is do a branching combo which are easy and their health goes half way down. sure its fun some times but u dont get addicted. mk need to stop worrying about graphics and work on their gameplay and storylines.

I found the original Mortal Kombat to be slow,annoying, and repetitive. None of the moves flowed the way may thumbs wished they did. The thing I found most annoying was the fact that you held back to trip instead of down. That's about as absurd as an uppercut doing more damage than a fireball to the nuts or being pulled by a rope attached to a knife that's embedded in your chest.

This isn't even a question.

- You had to press a button to block in MK, which didn't work effectively.
- MK's A.I was rigged, just look at Kabal in MK3 onwards.
- Uppercutting barely worked, because people the cpu would always mysteriously counter.
- Nobody knew how to do fatalies because gamefaqs didn't exist.
- MK4's fatalities were pathetic.
- MK progressively became worse in 3D. DA's fatalities were also lame (Quan Chi's "neck stretch")
- The story of MK contradicts itself. Characters die, and are magically in their sequels (Liu Kang, Sub Zero)

I've spent a huge amount of time with MK, and I didn't enjoy it. Takling about 50 or so hours across 1, 2, 3, 4, and DA. Mostly 1 trying to defeat the ridiculous 1v2 battles and Goro. Sure, it was addictive, but it isn't what the hype in the mid 90's is worth. It's media attention was only brought on by violence, and that's it. There was next to no blood in Street Fighter and it managed to compete side by side.

Also, KoF would come into it had there of been a proper version on the consoles (Megadrive and SNES) but it just didn't exist, and it was too late anyway.

In my mind, Street Fighter 2 is always going to be the classic 2D fighter; it’s branching evolution into the Alpha/Zero and crossover series helping to further enhance the reputation of the franchise.

Hype around MK centered around the blood, the fatalities (Finish him!) and the secret characters etc. Early on, ideas like endurance round, and mirror matches (originally lacking in SF2) helped to differentiate the series. My personal beef with the series was having to use a specific button for block –it was just something I never got used to. For me, MK II was probably the highlight of the series: the digitized graphics were revolutionary for the time, but it hasn’t aged well. While it had some original characters (Shang Tsung), and some signature moves (Scorpion, SubZero) were totally different from anything SF2 offered, most of it is forgettable.

I voted Mortal Kombat, but I'm not really sure why seeing as I haven't actually come up with a real decision yet.

Street Fighter was(is?) great because it's remained mostly basic over the years, but it changes enough to keep you interested. Except for the 3-D one(s?), which I really didn't enjoy.

I think I do like Mortal Kombat more though, because it is much more in depth. Combos, weapons, fatalities, all that good stuff. Being a kid, that was way more fun than just depleting someones life bar, you know?

Wow. Sad to see comments like this that illustrate how totally clueless most gamers these days are about fighting games.

First off, Street Fighter II fucking INVENTED the "combo," due to an unforseen glitch that allowed players to cancel the animation of attacks into other moves. So I really don't see how you can list "combos" as an advantage of MK over SF.

Second, how the fuck do cheap gimmicks like fatalities and weapons give a fighting game DEPTH? If you want depth, try playing Virtua Fighter. There's a reason you don't see MK being played in serious tournaments anywhere these days.

I have to give the nod to StreetFighter... something about the game feels more polished than Mortal Kombat. Don't get me wrong, I loved MK back in the day, but I think Street Fighter has the edge over it.

Street Fighter, with Mortal Kombat very close behind.

I love MK Deception's Konquest mode. I've yet to play MK armageddon.

Awwww

Wheres the love for Tekken??? What about SNK???

Well either way I voted for Street Fighter. To me Mortal Combat has become progressively worse as the days go on, but Street Fighter, or any other Capcom fighter has become progressively better as time goes on. BRING BACK PROJECT JUSTICE!!!!