How can he be biased, beyond his love of pixel art? He more or less concludes pixel art is not the best choice, and he sides with the public's opinion on this issue. Read the comments. He is not blaming anyone for this "pixel tax".
To my eyes, the SF4 Chun Li is infinitely inferior to SF3, and I'm not even an animator. And haven't played either game, so I truly have no preconceptions at all in this case.
The Chun Li comparison reminds me a lot of the messy transition between 2D and 3D of games like Final Fantasy and Mortal Kombat.
In Mortal Kombat, the typical shaolin monk character has a typical "shoot fireball" special move. In the latest SNES game, a badass dragon made of fire shoots out of his hand and explodes on contact with the enemy. In the next game, for the PlayStation, it looks like he is flinging a flaming turd at his opponent. Final Fantasy had similar problems in the transition from awesome 2D (FFVI) to awful 3D (FFVII).
Both Mortal Kombat and Final Fantasy eventually got 3D high definition graphics right, in my opinion. I hope eventually the artists will be as good and as experienced at making 3D art as they were at making 2D art in the SNES era.
The thing that set Mortal Kombat apart back in the day -- besides blood and gore -- was its use of digitized video of live actors as its character sprites. This couldn't be done in the 3D era, and up Through Mortal Kombat (2011) the 3D character models looked hella goofy when compared with real people.
SF4 has bad animation because it mixes mostly realistic motions with cartoonish anatomy. SF3 consistently uses cartoonish style for both. The only obvious reason somebody might prefer SF4 is if they really hate pixel art. I've played far more SF4 than SF3 and I still prefer the SF3 look.
To my eyes, the SF4 Chun Li is infinitely inferior to SF3, and I'm not even an animator. And haven't played either game, so I truly have no preconceptions at all in this case.