King Of Fighters 2003 Review

By Luke Albiges Published 14 March, 2006

What's a few years between friends?

Version tested: Xbox

Much like every other band that has prefixed its name with 'The' in recent memory should be politely informed that it isn't the seventies anymore, somebody really needs to tell SNK what year it is. For the last few we've been seeing Playmore milk the back catalogue seemingly at random, throwing out titles whose names make their ages perfectly clear to prospective purchasers. So almost exactly three years on from its Neo Geo release, does SNK's attempt to compete with the likes of Capcom Vs SNK 2 still cut it?

Honestly? No.

But then this was never the strongest game in the series to begin with. With so much variety in beat-'em-ups at the turn of the millennium, SNK had no choice but to pull out all the stops to try and compete. Picking your three party members as usual is warmingly familiar but once you get into battle, things start to go wrong. While it does offer the opportunity to switch characters, 2003's tag system simply doesn't know what it's trying to do. Team leaders do more damage and have exclusive access to the top end desperation moves, immediately losing you two often invaluable supers compared to previous KOF games; tagging out is slow and offers no health recovery, making it more or less redundant as a tactical tool. The whole thing just falls into a nondescript middle ground, surrounded by the thrills of Marvel Vs Capcom's flashy switches, SNK's own tactical striker system and the general solidity of Capcom Vs SNK 2's ratio-based teams. But if anything could save face for a King Of Fighters game, it was always going to be the character roster.

Same Old Brand New You

1

Ash might be an oddball but teammate Duolon is pretty much King Nonsense.

It's a known fact that SNK has toyed with move sets and character appearances between each King Of Fighters title with seemingly minimal method to its madness and 2003 is no exception. Whoever your character, expect at least a few minor changes but with an updated roster that includes several characters from the vastly superior Garou: Mark Of The Wolves, a change of scenery might not necessarily be a bad thing anyway. Grappler Tizoc, mix-up king Gato and MOTW Terry feel strangely unwieldy without Garou's supremely empowering Just Defence system but even so, it's tough not to love the variety in the cast. Catering for all styles of player - from the Shoto scrub to the 'partitioning' master who can throw out Sonic Booms like they're going out of fashion and more besides - and with a respectable number of characters overall, one on one fights can still excite to a certain extent.

With the significantly stronger King Of Fighters 2002 already occupying shelf and bargain bin space across the world and established favourites like Capcom Vs SNK 2 and Street Fighter III 3rd Strike to be found rather cheaply as well, there's little on which to recommend KOF2003 over its competitors. SNK completists will no doubt lap it up but there are quite simply much better fighting games out there.

5 / 10

Read the Eurogamer.net scoring policy

Comments (18) Latest comment 6 years ago

Comments for this article are now closed, but please feel free to continue chatting on the forum!

  • thegamesthething #1 6 years ago

    how do you know, have you played this one for 5 minutes?

  • login_name #2 6 years ago

    yup, it's dead

  • tengu #3 6 years ago

    I never really got on with this series. The only 2D fighter series I disliked more was Guilty Gear tbh.

  • login_name #4 6 years ago

    I loved KOF'95 and '96, was never a fan of '94. Not a huge fan of GG either, though I can appreciate why others might be.

  • ElephantMonkey #5 6 years ago

    Is this a live arcade game?

  • lemonfist #6 6 years ago

    That was a short review.

  • flp #7 6 years ago

    Have SNK ever made a decent game? Why play this when SF2 exists? Seriously though... even Metal Slug was made by someone else wasn't it?

  • Kain_Cross #8 6 years ago

    Have SNK ever made a decent game? Why play this when SF2 exists?

    Why play Street Fighter when Garou: Mark of the Wolves exists?
    Edited by Kain_Cross at 14/03/06 @ 17:27

  • Ranger101 #9 6 years ago

    "Why play Street Fighter when Garou: Mark of the Wolves exists? "


    Two words: Third Strike.

  • lambtron #10 6 years ago

    Garou is good, IIIrd Strike is good! Can't we all just get along :). I like the last blade games too... And SS ...

  • Hangman #11 6 years ago

    the review missed these important points...
    - Tagging isn't slow, you do HCF + both P+K (1 stock special) and your tag partner immediately comes in with a move!
    - No mention of the completely new 3D backgrounds that make more use of the hardware
    - Or the new Arranged soundtrack , so it actually sounds up-to-date rather than the synthesised music on the KOF 2002 port
    - LIVE support FFS!

    bah.
    and have SNK ever made a good game? hello? did you go to an arcade in the 90's?

  • #12 6 years ago

    That was a short review.

    I wish all review were that short.

    :-o

  • Zuiyo #13 6 years ago

    Too short. This is not the review I paid for.

  • Xerx3s #14 6 years ago

    wtf is up with KoF & crappy graphics?

  • flp #15 6 years ago

    Hangman: I visited plenty of arcades in the 90s, please tell me which SNK games are genuinely good though, I can't see past Super SF2 Turbo.

  • JHuxley #16 6 years ago

    flp: SNK took over the Metal Slug games after the first version. X/2 and 3 are probably the best in the series. They've also made the King of Figters series, Mark of the Wolves and the Last Blade games which many would rank amongst the finest 2D fighters ever made.

    Sure, they've lost their way a little in recent years but with Capcom still stuck making those gimmicky 'Vs' games, I don't think they're in danger of being surpassed anytime soon.

  • Wrestlevania #17 6 years ago

    I think this review is short because it's incomplete and pretty poor...

    Review: "tagging out [...] offers no health recovery, making it more or less redundant as a tactical tool."

    ...except for the fact that it allows you to mix fighting styles during matches. This in turn allows you to tailor the fight to suit your needs, counter-acting any specialism the current opponent might have (in terms of fighting style). I'm also struggling to recall any other previous iterations of King of Fighters that have supported this magical health regeneration feature - my experience of the series isn't exhaustive though. Have you actually played any of the King of Fighters games before? You appear to be missing the whole point of tag team fighting entirely, especially in such a technical series as King of Fighters.

    You've neglected to review the single most important aspect of any fighting game - player vs. player gaming. And not just on the same machine; King of Fighter 2003 supports Live, FFS - could there be any more significant a feature in a 2D fighting game?

    JHuxley: "[SNK] also made the King of Fighters series, Mark of the Wolves and the Last Blade games which many would rank amongst the finest 2D fighters ever made."

    Agreed - but I'd go further by saying that I think Garou: Mark of the Wolves is quite possibly the best (technical) fighting game ever produced. One for the Street Fighter addicts of old to certainly get their teeth into; really is quite a marvel.

    Anyway; a very poor review. Shame on you, Eurogamer - and after such a prolific streak of excellent writing, too.
    Edited by Wrestlevania at 16/03/06 @ 15:46

  • Nikanoru #18 6 years ago

    wtf is up with KoF & crappy graphics?

    While I will not say anything about the game as a whole, I request that you kindly shut the fuck up about the graphics. The animations are wonderful.