Full disclosure: I don't play or really like fighting games. I mean, I like the occasional Street Fighter, but only when I'm playing against someone of equal talents, by which I mean, someone who has never played a fighting game before ever.
So I drank a glass of Bailey's and spent an hour or so with King of Fighters '94. How is it different from other fighting games, as far as I can see? Well, it has a neat team system where you pick three characters instead of one, and when you die instead of just getting “another life" your character is tapped out and the next one rotates in. This adds some variety and challenge since you must know not only your character's moves, but the moves of all three of your opponents.
Other than that and the sharp music, I can't tell you what's so great about this game. It felt like a fighting game in that I pushed a lot of buttons, tried out some combos, fought to rise in the ranks, and failed. Am I willing to admit that I'm biased against fighting games? Sure. I'm also willing to state that anyone who plays this genre exclusively has some pretty messed up primary concerns in video gaming. But I'm not recommending the whole genre for fans, just any game that has you memorizing complex button combinations in order to play it competently. I got pounded into ground beef while playing this game, and there isn't much hope for me to improve. I honestly believe, or maybe it's hope, that most gamers just mash their way through fighting games. When it comes to that, King of Fighters seems mash-worthy. No cheap kills, no overpowered characters (and no interesting ones either), no sloppy level or graphical design. King of Fighters '94 is somewhat different from other fighters I've played, but not that much.