I don't know why but people say it wasn't as good as the first two MK games. They never gave a reason why. It improves over everything the MK1 and 2 had so what's up? Over the years, I also thought like everyone else thinking it didn't match the success of the first MKs, but now when I play it, it's kinda cool.
I totally agree. This is one of the most underrated fighthing games in history. The soundtrack is excellent, the plot is the best, the kombos were easy to perform and were great, ....the main problem as many fans say is that the fatalities were very toned down (example: Stryker's electric shot gun, both of Liu Kang's fatalities, Kabal's scream, etc.).
Also, it wasn't clever to take off the game the most popular characters! Die hard fans missed Scorpion in the first place, Baraka who became the "hit" character in part II, and the always controvertial Reptile. Instead, they brought less interesting characters like Stryker, Sheeva, and the Robots.
"Hate is baggage, life's too short to be pissed off all the time".
I DO hate how it became watered down by Ultimate and Trilogy. The quality lowered by leaps. Still, the very first regular MK3 i love, it ain't so complete, but retains that feeling of novelty. By Trilogy it's recycling at it's worst, and it just doesn't feel unique at all. Sorta how i feel with Armageddon recycling some stuff too. But meh, an MK is an MK, and you've gotta love MK.
What the hell are u talking about? Trilogy was great! you know why? because they basically put every character that we missed from Mortal Kombat 3 back in the game, such as scorpion, classic sub zero, and Baraka. ALL those guys they put back in. In fact they put quite a lot back in, and along with some of the really awesome new characters. Armageddon kicked ass, it includes almost every single character in the series, 64 characters...that's quite a *beep* load. It's great.