Support NeoGAF

[Lifeline]

I think they have another team working on XX localization or continuing the 3DS engine on the Switch with a new game. I doubt World would come to it.

I mean, how much downgraded do you think it'll be? We aren't talking about modern warfare Wii here, world is certainly not maxing out neither the ps4 nor xb1

Graphics looked better than anything on the switch at the moment, but that's easy to downgrade. I think it being a seamless open world and the stuff in the OP about using "extra computational power" to have all the monsters interact with each other/fight each other might be harder to do.

The Switch doesn't really have a lot of modern ports so we can compare what kind of downgrades are needed.

Because that's a design choice.
The Switch could absolutely run MHW at 720p with simpler shadows/lighting, but could we get back on topic?

Skyrim is a 6 year old open world game and it still had to be downgraded on the Switch. You think it can run a 2018 game by just turning the resolution down to 720p?

Basically, are you going to take the director of Monster Hunter 4 at his word? Because this isn't just any Capcom suit saying these things.

I'll take a random 4chan rumor over his word - this thread

 

[Godzilla's Left Toe]

I think they have another team working on XX localization or continuing the 3DS engine on the Switch with a new game. I doubt World would come to it.



Graphics looked better than anything on the switch at the moment, but that's easy to downgrade. I think it being a seamless open world and the stuff in the OP about using "extra computational power" to have all the monsters interact with each other/fight each other might be harder to do.

The Switch doesn't really have a lot of modern ports so we can compare what kind of downgrades are needed.



Skyrim is a 6 year old open world game and it still had to be downgraded on the Switch. You think it can run a 2018 game by just turning the resolution down to 720p?

I'll take a random 4chan rumor over his word - this thread

lol a system that can run UE4 is going to keep using MT Framework mobile even after USF2 used the console MT Framework.

 

[NintendosBooger]

Skyrim is a 6 year old open world game and it still had to be downgraded on the Switch. You think it can run a 2018 game by just turning the resolution down to 720p?

You going to mention that the comparison image came from a maxed-out PC, or were you going to let everyone guess that?

 

[JP_]

lol a system that can run UE4 is going to keep using MT Framework mobile even after USF2 used the console MT Framework.

You think they're going to make a Switch-exclusive monster hunter game? Instead of continuing to up-port 3DS games?

 

[Plum]

This really makes me uncertain about whether this will be a success. Even with all the QoL and gameplay improvements the game will still be Monster Hunter which I just don't think has the potential to really grow as much as Capcom seems to want. It's, after all, going to be a $60 game competing pretty directly with other massive time-sinks like Destiny 2 and, if it's actually released then, the behemoth of Red Dead Redemption 2. We'll just have to see.

 

[Jimmyfenix]

This really makes me uncertain about whether this will be a success. Even with all the QoL and gameplay improvements the game will still be Monster Hunter which I just don't think has the potential to really grow as much as Capcom seems to want. It's, after all, going to be a $60 game competing pretty directly with other massive time-sinks like Destiny 2 and, if it's actually released then, the behemoth of Red Dead Redemption 2. We'll just have to see.

I never knew every $60 is competing with destiny 2 and RDR2

What a weird comparison

 

[Toxi]

This really makes me uncertain about whether this will be a success. Even with all the QoL and gameplay improvements the game will still be Monster Hunter which I just don't think has the potential to really grow as much as Capcom seems to want. It's, after all, going to be a $60 game competing pretty directly with other massive time-sinks like Destiny 2 and, if it's actually released then, the behemoth of Red Dead Redemption 2. We'll just have to see.

I think just improving the start of the game can do wonders. Ideally, players should get to hunt large monsters as soon as possible. Less gathering or small monsters quests.

 

[JP_]

This really makes me uncertain about whether this will be a success. Even with all the QoL and gameplay improvements the game will still be Monster Hunter which I just don't think has the potential to really grow as much as Capcom seems to want. It's, after all, going to be a $60 game competing pretty directly with other massive time-sinks like Destiny 2 and, if it's actually released then, the behemoth of Red Dead Redemption 2. We'll just have to see.

This isn't 2006 -- Dark Souls has since made waves on home consoles and PC worldwide. A lot of those fans will love what Monster Hunter does.

I think it's very possible for MHW on PS4 in Japan to sell better than MHXX on Switch in Japan. Bigger install base, MHW is a big new game, and I think a lot of people overstate the importance of mh portability in 2018. Worldwide, I'd bet MHW hits 2-3m if not more. Wouldn't be surprised if it takes a couple games before they're back up to their ~3-4m numbers -- moving to modern consoles is a transition.

 

[DrROBschiz]

Omg... we're back to people thinking Switch can run MHW lol

Sorry, there's a reason most multi platform games are skipping switch and it's not that they're Nintendo haters or don't want the extra sales

ok but to be fair..

it is running on MT Framework still

 

[Eolz]

What are you basing this on? Design choice to cap a game at 30 when it could run at 60? Makes no sense. Switch has half the ram, inferior CPU/GPU that underclocks further while undocked, different GPU architecture -- you guys are underestimating the difficulty. If it really was so easy, you'd see more games doing it.

Weird coincidence that many of the same people critical of MHW think it'd be an easy port to Switch and Capcom must have some other reason for not porting it

I'm a dev, worked on various platforms, and know enough people and tech to understand if an engine could work or not on X or Y (even if obviously there's no "port to X" button and nothing to do afterwards, impossible).
You are really underestimating the specs and looking only at numbers without trying to get how it works. CPU and GPU are modern and capable enough, ram is an issue for specific games, architecture is not an issue at all.
Again, it'd be possible at solid 30fps, 720p, weaker lighting/shadows, texture res, and some other effects. MHW is not pushing much, be it polygons (like Horizon), physics (like Snake Pass), AI/numbers of NPCs, etc. And it's running on the branch of an engine already running on Switch, needing even less dev time.

Weird coincidence that only those being critical about MHW seem to understand tech enough to see that it's not mindblowing for its platform.
And hey, if you want others to take your arguments seriously, stop using that thinking emoji. Only makes you look like something with no real reasoning.

Graphics looked better than anything on the switch at the moment, but that's easy to downgrade. I think it being a seamless open world and the stuff in the OP about using "extra computational power" to have all the monsters interact with each other/fight each other might be harder to do.

The Switch doesn't really have a lot of modern ports so we can compare what kind of downgrades are needed.



Skyrim is a 6 year old open world game and it still had to be downgraded on the Switch. You think it can run a 2018 game by just turning the resolution down to 720p?

See above for more details.
Gamebryo is a fucking mess, on any platform.
The Switch indeed doesn't have a lot of modern ports due to third party publishers being wary after the WiiU, not being convinced there's an audience for their games, and not having the time and/or devkit to develop something yet.

edit: but seriously, can we get back on topic?

 

[Lifeline]

You going to mention that the comparison image came from a maxed-out PC, or were you going to let everyone guess that?

It's the 6 year old original game, not the special edition.The PS4 version of Skyrim looks better than the 6 year old maxed out version. I'm not comparing frame rate here, if it can't match the graphics of a 6 year old game, my point about MHW stands which looks better than the original and special edition of Skyrim.

 

[ggx2ac]

You think they're going to make a Switch-exclusive monster hunter game? Instead of continuing to up-port 3DS games?

I don't get what you're saying here, he is correcting someone because Capcom has already got the MT Framework engine running on Switch.

 

[schuelma]

This isn't 2006 -- Dark Souls has since made waves on home consoles and PC worldwide. A lot of those fans will love what Monster Hunter does.

I think it's very possible for MHW on PS4 in Japan to sell better than MHXX on Switch in Japan. Bigger install base, MHW is a big new game, and I think a lot of people overstate the importance of mh portability in 2018. Worldwide, I'd bet MHW hits 2-3m if not more. Wouldn't be surprised if it takes a couple games before they're back up to their ~3-4m numbers -- moving to modern consoles is a transition.

If Capcom only sells 2-3 million of what is undoubtedly its most expensive MH game ever, Capcom is going to be in a world of hurt

 

[BitStyle]

If Capcom only sells 2-3 million of what is undoubtedly its most expensive MH game ever, Capcom is going to be in a world of hurt

Yeah, I'd imagine they'd be aiming for around 4 million at least. Unlike 3DS and PSP gens the budget for this title will be undoubtedly larger. I would assume to make the most of the title, Capcom will opt for a larger DLC release calendar, since they could add all the usual MH DLC alongside the "ultimate" additions such as G-Rank. Gen 5 will probably last longer than the previous ones.

 

[Plum]

I never knew every $60 is competing with destiny 2 and RDR2

What a weird comparison

Why go straight to misconstruing my argument in an attempt to have a "gotcha" moment instead of trying to rebuke it? Monster Hunter World is Capcom's clear attempt to try and get Monster Hunter to "grow" in the West, and this will be only be the case if it surpasses the sales of 3DS MH titles quite significantly considering it's also got to recoup the greater dev costs of modern HD development and make up for inevitable lost sales due to Japan's portable focus.

However, it's going to be a $60 multiplayer-leaning semi-RPG in a period where Destiny 2, another game of the same ilk, and RDR2 which is, well, RDR2 (not to mention God of War and other titles) are prevalent. The kinds of sales needed to reach the 4+m mark Capcom might want are sales from those who can't buy every game out there, who might be turned off quite a bit from the still-niche features MHW will carry alongside it. Unlike NieR Automata, Persona 5 or Yakuza 0 the expectations will be for more than just capturing a niche which is why I'm saying it will be competing directly with those titles.

This isn't 2006 -- Dark Souls has since made waves on home consoles and PC worldwide. A lot of those fans will love what Monster Hunter does.

I think it's very possible for MHW on PS4 in Japan to sell better than MHXX on Switch in Japan. Bigger install base, MHW is a big new game, and I think a lot of people overstate the importance of mh portability in 2018. Worldwide, I'd bet MHW hits 2-3m if not more. Wouldn't be surprised if it takes a couple games before they're back up to their ~3-4m numbers -- moving to modern consoles is a transition.

The thing with the Souls series is that, even with the near household-name status it has with gaming culture nowadays, it's not exactly a mass seller. Dark Souls 3 'only' sold around 3 million units despite being the most heavily marketed game in the franchise. Bloodborne as well, despite having so much reverence from GAF and the like, is still more of a symbolic symbol of Sony's first-party success instead of the literal, sales-based symbol games like Uncharted 4 or Horizon are. There's also no guarantee Soulsborne fans will like the lack of story, long-as-fuck progression systems, long-as-fuck battles, etc of Monster Hunter; they're not exactly the most similar of games.

As for your transition point, again, that could be Capcom's strategy but I seriously doubt it. Capcom are taking on 2 incredibly costly risks here: abandoning a lot of portable sales in Japan and pumping the kind of marketing/development money needed to create a modern HD title that debuts center-stage at Sony's E3 conference. That doesn't seem like MHW is being put out as a humble transitionary game, Capcom clearly wants (and probably needs) this game to be a success in that 4-5m range.

I think just improving the start of the game can do wonders. Ideally, players should get to hunt large monsters as soon as possible. Less gathering or small monsters quests.

Yeah, definitely, the start of MH games is what's kept me from really getting into a lot of them. However, as the interview says, if the game's still going to have the deep systems of previous games people are still going to need to be taught. They can take the material gathering and stuff out but can they also put you straight into fighting high-level monsters because they're the most fun whilst not making the game too easy for long-time veterans?

 

[Lifeline]

If Capcom only sells 2-3 million of what is undoubtedly its most expensive MH game ever, Capcom is going to be in a world of hurt

RE7 recouped its development cost at 2.5 million copies shipped, I don't think Capcom would invest more in a Monster Hunter game than a Resident Evil game.

 

[schuelma]

RE7 recouped its development cost at 2.5 million copies shipped, I don't think Capcom would invest more in a Monster Hunter game than a Resident Evil game.

I'll put it another way- if MH World sells significantly less than previous mainline MH titles despite being the most expensive, Capcom will be in a world of hurt

 

[AmethystEnd]

Bunch of stuff.

You completely write off Soulsborne fans possibly liking this game because "they're not exactly the most similar games" but continue to push the narrative that MHW is going to directly compete with Destiny 2 for being online and an rpg. So in one of your comparisons (Souls), consumers are smart enough to tell gameplay differences, but in your other comparison (Destiny 2), consumers are complete idiots who think "OMG, RPG AND ONLINE, THESE ARE THE SAME GAME".

Please. Quit with the armchair analysis.

 

[Toxi]

I'll put it another way- if MH World sells significantly less than previous mainline MH titles despite being the most expensive, Capcom will be in a world of hurt

Tri sold 2 million copies.

 

[schuelma]

Tri sold 2 million copies.

yup- and it was the first and last Wii title and quickly moved back to portables

 

[JP_]

I'm a dev, worked on various platforms, and know enough people and tech to understand if an engine could work or not on X or Y (even if obviously there's no "port to X" button and nothing to do afterwards, impossible).
You are really underestimating the specs and looking only at numbers without trying to get how it works. CPU and GPU are modern and capable enough, ram is an issue for specific games, architecture is not an issue at all.
Again, it'd be possible at solid 30fps, 720p, weaker lighting/shadows, texture res, and some other effects. MHW is not pushing much, be it polygons (like Horizon), physics (like Snake Pass), AI/numbers of NPCs, etc. And it's running on the branch of an engine already running on Switch, needing even less dev time.

Weird coincidence that only those being critical about MHW seem to understand tech enough to see that it's not mindblowing for its platform.
And hey, if you want others to take your arguments seriously, stop using that thinking emoji. Only makes you look like something with no real reasoning.[/B]

Dev here, too. I'm not suggesting it'd be impossible to downgrade it so far that it runs on Switch -- I'm suggesting Capcom thinks it's too much work to downgrade it (and basically have to maintain another SKU moving forward) or perhaps even too compromising for their vision for the game. Sure, MHW isn't "mindblowing" on PS4, for a PS4 game -- nobody said it was. But like many multiplatform PS4 games, while not mindblowing, MHW is already more impressive than anything on Switch. To get something like Horizon to run on PS4, a lot more work has to be done to optimize it -- and it doesn't look like Capcom is willing to do that for MHW, hence the 30fps on PS4 despite it not looking mindblowing. And that's normal -- that's how it is for most multiplatform games. They're usually not optimized to the extreme, like Horizon.

And I'd just like to point out, you're already moving the goal post lol. First it was just 720p with lighting/shadow downgrade, now it's also textures (I guess you forgot about the RAM, which would almost certainly be an issue in MHW) and "effects." One thing to consider is that if you downgrade a game so much, it might just look too ugly to release even if it runs at an ok framerate. When assets are designed for a certain spec, to be accompanied by certain effects, the art style could very well fall apart when you remove those effects and downgrade those assets too much. That's why alternate art styles are more popular on lower spec devices -- design the art style and the assets around those limitations so the overall aesthetic is stronger.

 

[Toxi]

yup- and it was the first and last Wii title and quickly moved back to portables

Outside 4, the first game of every generation has been a home console release. They're just trying it again with World. If it messes up, they use what they have for Monster Hunter World Portable. Hell, even if World succeeds, Capcom will still use it as the basis for Monster Hunter World Portable.

 

[Plum]

You completely write off Soulsborne fans possibly liking this game because "they're not exactly the most similar games" but continue to push the narrative that MHW is going to directly compete with Destiny 2 for being online and an rpg. So in one of your comparisons (Souls), consumers are smart enough to tell gameplay differences, but in your other comparison (Destiny 2), consumers are complete idiots who think "OMG, RPG AND ONLINE, THESE ARE THE SAME GAME".

Please. Quit with the armchair analysis.

What the hell?

In both comparisons consumers are smart enough to see gameplay differences and buy what they want to accordingly. How you got what you did from my post is baffling to me.

Competition in business, by its very nature, is consumers using what they know of two or more different products and making a purchasing decision based on that; I don't think many consumers, the ones needed to break that 4+m sales mark, are going to see Monster Hunter as a viable alternative to the massive games they are either already playing or are about to play. Same with the Dark Souls comparison, they're not similar games and there's no guarantee a Souls fan will want to buy MHW just because they're both Japanese Action RPGs. Maybe directly competing isn't the best term to use but, one way or another, Monster Hunter World will be competing with those behemoths if Capcom wants it to become a success.

 

[JP_]

I don't get what you're saying here, he is correcting someone because Capcom has already got the MT Framework engine running on Switch.

MHXX on Switch is running on mobile MT right? That's so they can make one game and release on 3DS & Switch. Switch can run console MT, sure, but then they couldn't release it on 3DS.

So Lifeline was guessing that if they release future mh games on Switch, they'd keep doing what they've been doing so that those games can also release on 3DS. Lifeline didn't suggest Switch couldn't run console MT, so no, he wasn't correcting him.

If Capcom only sells 2-3 million of what is undoubtedly its most expensive MH game ever, Capcom is going to be in a world of hurt

Or they're smart enough to realize this is an investment and a lot of that work will carry over into sequels.

 

[KiNolin]

yup- and it was the first and last Wii title and quickly moved back to portables

It wasn't. Also, it's not *that* hard to understand Capcom's business model here (which they repeat for a reason). Tap into the market with a semi-successful core game. Then do full cash-ins with souped up versions of the same core title shortly after.

 

[NintendosBooger]

It's the 6 year old original game, not the special edition.The PS4 version of Skyrim looks better than the 6 year old maxed out version. I'm not comparing frame rate here, if it can't match the graphics of a 6 year old game, my point about MHW stands which looks better than the original and special edition of Skyrim.

So next question: is the Switch version there taken from a livestream?

 

[BitStyle]

MHXX on Switch is running on mobile MT right? That's so they can make one game and release on 3DS & Switch. Switch can run console MT, sure, but then they couldn't release it on 3DS.

So Lifeline was guessing that if they release future mh games on Switch, they'd keep doing what they've been doing so that those games can also release on 3DS. Lifeline didn't suggest Switch couldn't run console MT, so no, he wasn't correcting him.



Or they're smart enough to realize this is an investment and a lot of that work will carry over into sequels.

I'm not sure what incentive they would have for releasing a MH for 3DS in 2019, as I'm sure Switch will have grown a nice install base. Plus, as you mention with regards to reusing MHW assets, it would work more favorably to scale it across to Switch versus taking said assets and downsizing them for 3DS.

 

[schuelma]

It wasn't. Also, it's not *that* hard to understand Capcom's business model here (which they repeat for a reason). Tap into the market with a semi-successful core game. Then do full cash-ins with souped up versions of the same core title shortly after.

Doh forgot about G. I agree they will make a Switch game - but I think their expectations are a lot higher than "semi-successful" for World.

 

[schuelma]

Or they're smart enough to realize this is an investment and a lot of that work will carry over into sequels.

The goal is to expand the franchise. Not shrink it.

 

[Chindogg]

What are you basing this on? Design choice to cap a game at 30 when it could run at 60? Makes no sense. Switch has half the ram, inferior CPU/GPU that underclocks further while undocked, different GPU architecture -- you guys are underestimating the difficulty. If it really was so easy, you'd see more games doing it.

Weird coincidence that many of the same people critical of MHW think it'd be an easy port to Switch and Capcom must have some other reason for not porting it

Probably because they didn't get devkit in time to make a port on a console with an unknown market base.

It's a MT Framework game. It should technically run on Switch. Why it runs at 30fps on PS4 could be a number of reasons from graphics to animation.

For someone complaining about console wars and hate you're quickly shifting into the "real system" line of argument.

 

[ggx2ac]

Dev here, too. I'm not suggesting it'd be impossible to downgrade it so far that it runs on Switch -- I'm suggesting Capcom thinks it's too much work to downgrade it (and basically have to maintain another SKU moving forward) or perhaps even too compromising for their vision for the game. Sure, MHW isn't "mindblowing" on PS4, for a PS4 game -- nobody said it was. But like many multiplatform PS4 games, while not mindblowing, MHW is already more impressive than anything on Switch. To get something like Horizon to run on PS4, a lot more work has to be done to optimize it -- and it doesn't look like Capcom is willing to do that for MHW, hence the 30fps on PS4 despite it not looking mindblowing. And that's normal -- that's how it is for most multiplatform games. They're usually not optimized to the extreme, like Horizon.

You'd have a point if MHW was running on the Panta Rhei engine and is exclusive to PS4.

It's not though, it's running on MT Framework and is multiplatform which includes PC which means there'll be systems weaker than an Xbox One running MHW.

Why would it be too much work to downgrade when it has to run on PC and they already have MT Framework running on Switch?

 

[JP_]

As for your transition point, again, that could be Capcom's strategy but I seriously doubt it. Capcom are taking on 2 incredibly costly risks here: abandoning a lot of portable sales in Japan and pumping the kind of marketing/development money needed to create a modern HD title that debuts center-stage at Sony's E3 conference. That doesn't seem like MHW is being put out as a humble transitionary game, Capcom clearly wants (and probably needs) this game to be a success in that 4-5m range.

This is such a weird line of reasoning. Understanding that it might take a couple games to build the numbers back up during a transition doesn't mean they'd intentionally go light on marketing and budget -- Capcom seems to be doing everything to make MHW the biggest success possible because of course they would it would be stupid not to. The bigger success MHW is, the bigger the sequels will probably be.

But MH has a long history of reusing assets and I don't expect that to change. So while other games can reuse things like rendering and animation pipelines they develop in the first game, MH will be able to reuse a lot more -- monsters, maps, armor, weapons, etc -- not just the technical foundation, but a lot of the content in MHW2 (or whatever) is already being made now. This is an investment for Capcom. This is different from previous console releases where they simply ported the mobile game.

Edit: ok this porting talk is just getting weird. It seems many of you are under the impression that simply being able to run an engine is sufficient to port any game running on that engine. Engine compatibility is more about things like graphics library and shader model support. Sure, you'd want the engine to run on the platform, but whether a port is realistic is more about what the game does with the engine. Unity runs on damn near everything but that doesn't mean you can port PS4 games to iPhone 3GS.

Textures are not special for MHW from what we've seen so far, but depending on how they make it work in an open world, lowering a bit the texture res might be useful. I really doubt it though. Same thing for "effects" (in which I include particles, various vfx, motion blur and other "enhancements" which I didn't notice), which are fine for now, but could be changed to fit the newer res and/or other graphical changes.
But those are optional. Just gave more details in case it was needed.

Half as much RAM, won't need to touch the textures? Good luck with that.

 

[Eolz]

Dev here, too. I'm not suggesting it'd be impossible to downgrade it so far that it runs on Switch -- I'm suggesting Capcom thinks it's too much work to downgrade it (and basically have to maintain another SKU moving forward) or perhaps even too compromising for their vision for the game. Sure, MHW isn't "mindblowing" on PS4, for a PS4 game -- nobody said it was. But like many multiplatform PS4 games, while not mindblowing, MHW is already more impressive than anything on Switch. To get something like Horizon to run on PS4, a lot more work has to be done to optimize it -- and it doesn't look like Capcom is willing to do that for MHW, hence the 30fps on PS4 despite it not looking mindblowing. And that's normal -- that's how it is for most multiplatform games. They're usually not optimized to the extreme, like Horizon.

And I'd just like to point out, you're already moving the goal post lol. First it was just 720p with lighting/shadow downgrade, now it's also textures (I guess you forgot about the RAM, which would almost certainly be an issue in MHW) and "effects." One thing to consider is that if you downgrade a game so much, it might just look too ugly to release even if it runs at an ok framerate. When assets are designed for a certain spec, to be accompanied by certain effects, the art style could very well fall apart when you remove those effects and downgrade those assets too much. That's why alternate art styles are more popular on lower spec devices -- design the art style and the assets around those limitations so the overall aesthetic is stronger.

I'm not moving the goal post, I was giving all the details that could be needed, but not absolutely needed. Unlike the resolution and lighting which would have to take a hit for sure.
Textures are not special for MHW from what we've seen so far, but depending on how they make it work in an open world, lowering a bit the texture res might be useful. I really doubt it though. Same thing for "effects" (in which I include particles, various vfx, motion blur and other "enhancements" which I didn't notice), which are fine for now, but could be changed to fit the newer res and/or other graphical changes.
But those are optional. Just gave more details in case it was needed.

MHXX on Switch is running on mobile MT right? That's so they can make one game and release on 3DS & Switch. Switch can run console MT, sure, but then they couldn't release it on 3DS.

So Lifeline was guessing that if they release future mh games on Switch, they'd keep doing what they've been doing so that those games can also release on 3DS. Lifeline didn't suggest Switch couldn't run console MT, so no, he wasn't correcting him.
.

It's unclear if MHXXS is running under MT mobile or MT console. USF2's minigame is running on MT console.
From what Capcom said in the past, it's trivial to port from MT mobile to MT console though, so I don't really see the issue in having XX on MT mobile and XXS on MT console, considering the assets and game structure.


Back on topic, I also really doubt that Capcom is thinking "it's fine, it'll pay off 2 games from now". They've never done that from what I can remember.

 

[Plum]

This is such a weird line of reasoning. Understanding that it might take a couple games to build the numbers back up during a transition doesn't mean they'd intentionally go light on marketing and budget -- Capcom seems to be doing everything to make MHW the biggest success possible because of course they would it would be stupid not to. The bigger success MHW is, the bigger the sequels will probably be.

But MH has a long history of reusing assets and I don't expect that to change. So while other games can reuse things like rendering and animation pipelines they develop in the first game, MH will be able to reuse a lot more -- monsters, maps, armor, weapons, etc -- not just the technical foundation, but a lot of the content in MHW2 (or whatever) is already being made now. This is an investment for Capcom. This is different from previous console releases where they simply ported the mobile game.

Huh? I literally said they want (and need) this game to be a success and they're going to put a lot of money into marketing. I have no clue where your entire first paragraph came from.

As for your second paragraph, how does them being able to reuse assets and such in later games make the first a humble investment game that would do fine with just 2-or-so million copies? We're talking sales here, not assets, so Capcom isn't going to be able to use the "but it's just a development investment in future games!" excuse when their expensive-to-produce and expensive-to-market new HD Monster Hunter game fails to meet expectations. If Monster Hunter fails to recoup its significant development and marketing costs nobody is going to be happy; this is especially true since Capcom isn't exactly giving themselves much lee-way in terms of returning to the tried-and-tested portable focus of prior years.

I don't understand the "ported the mobile game" bit. I thought we were talking about all Monster Hunter games, not just the few released on home consoles in recent years.

 

[Khezu]

IMO, the best route for making MHW profitable would be to heavily lean into the PC version, and have a good strategy for games as a service.

MH is as series that is perfect for DLC, lots of it.

But hopefully less gross anime DLC.

 

[Chindogg]

IMO, the best route for making MHW profitable would be to heavily lean into the PC version, and have a good strategy for games as a service.

MH is as series that is perfect for DLC, lots of it.

But hopefully less gross anime DLC.

?????

MH DLC is mostly other Capcom games. They had one Palico costume from Fairy Tail but that's about it.

 

[ZoddGutts]

Man all this MHXX and Switch port of MH:W talk... soon we're going to need a rule of not mentioning those things since it will derail the threads for MH:W. Bringing up "sales concerns" post is already making lol.

 

[Khezu]

?????

MH DLC is mostly other Capcom games. They had one Palico costume from Fairy Tail but that's about it.

I'm never going to let the Inuyasha thing go.

 

[RoboGeorgeForeman]

I'm never going to let the Inuyasha thing go.

What Inuyasha thing?

 

[DrROBschiz]

It will be nice to get some real DLC for a change and not a shuffling of ingame assets and costumes

Actual new maps, monsters, etc would be nice

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

On the topic of DLC...something I'm just throwing out there, if Capcom were to stop doing "G" versions for MH World and just release big content updates intermittently, almost like Seasons, would that be a bad thing?

Essentially, rather than having to wait a year and a half for a retail G version, the content that would go in said version is spread out in updates that drop throughout that year and a half.

 

[DrROBschiz]

On the topic of DLC...something I'm just throwing out there, if Capcom were to stop doing "G" versions for MH World and just release big content updates intermittently, almost like Seasons, would that be a bad thing?

Essentially, rather than having to wait a year and a half for a retail G version, the content that would go in said version is spread out in updates that drop throughout that year and a half.

I would be all down for that and its not like they havent been trending that way anyways

 

[Ridley327]

On the topic of DLC...something I'm just throwing out there, if Capcom were to stop doing "G" versions for MH World and just release big content updates intermittently, almost like Seasons, would that be a bad thing?

Essentially, rather than having to wait a year and a half for a retail G version, the content that would go in said version is spread out in updates that drop throughout that year and a half.

Not necessarily, but the price has to be right. Anything less than the equivalent of a G-rank expansion in terms of content and especially at any more than the total price of one would be subject to immediate and justified scorn.

 

[AdventureRacing]

On the topic of DLC...something I'm just throwing out there, if Capcom were to stop doing "G" versions for MH World and just release big content updates intermittently, almost like Seasons, would that be a bad thing?

Essentially, rather than having to wait a year and a half for a retail G version, the content that would go in said version is spread out in updates that drop throughout that year and a half.

I think this is a part of why they're targeting the PS4/xbone/PC. DLC has become an ever increasing source of revenue and allows games to continue making good money long after release. This gives MHW the potential to be more profitable than previous monster hunters even if sales numbers aren't that impressive.

I can definitely see the appeal of this approach and regular content is great. Personally though I just don't like paying for regular DLC. I'll take free DLC but otherwise I'd rather just wait and get an expansion and have everything at once.

 

[Night Angel]

Not necessarily, but the price has to be right. Anything less than the equivalent of a G-rank expansion in terms of content and especially at any more than the total price of one would be subject to immediate and justified scorn.

They couldn't do worse than charging the price of a full game for the expansion, right?

 

[MatrixMan.EXE]

I would be all down for that and its not like they havent been trending that way anyways

True enough. The DLC support for the 3DS games has been pretty stellar. If we were to continue to get free DLC in the same vein alongside meatier, paid pieces of content instead of a new G release, I'd be perfectly happy if it's priced correctly.

Not necessarily, but the price has to be right. Anything less than the equivalent of a G-rank expansion in terms of content and especially at any more than the total price of one would be subject to immediate and justified scorn.

Yeah, price point would be a huge factor for sure. In practice I think it could go down well though and I'm not convinced that their current release strategy for MH games is doing to fly outside of the traditional fan base.

 

[Khezu]

What Inuyasha thing?

His sword is an event weapon in few of the games.

 

[Ridley327]

They couldn't do worse than charging the price of a full game for the expansion, right?

Judging by how they've been handling their other major GaaS title in SFV... well, you might get a better idea of my skepticism.

 

[TwilightPrincess]

Naming mistake of Wii U proportion

I still believe they will make Monster Hunter 5.

 

[DrROBschiz]

I still believe they will make Monster Hunter 5.

oh geez

World IS 5th gen

Any future potential portable title will also be based on 5th gen

Lets say it again. This is 5th gen