Support NeoGAF

[Nirolak]

From the previous thread, mostly for Nirolak to follow up on mobile and a question I had:



Most (all?) of these games are gacha, right? With the general trend on the market slowing its growth, are these titles lateral transitions in the market from competing products or are we seeing a centralization at the top and the charts out of the Top~5-10 becoming smaller and smaller parts of the overall market?

With the way all of these are gacha, it boggles the mind that people can spend this much money on so many different "same thing, different skin" products with imaginary worth. And because of the expect tail off in growth on the mobile market, this means people are moving either laterally or up from older/other products, and leaving behind *huge* investments in gacha for... more gacha.

Did you see my question earlier on the mobile stuff?

(Did I maybe miss a response?)

Yes, sorry, I was just swamped this week.

So, there are a few things happening here:

1.) There is still some growth in the mobile market, in the form of a few hundred million every year. Generally the biggest hits are what are going to be pushing that.

2.) It's important to keep in mind that Japan's mobile market is a bit different than the West. The amount of people monetizing is closer to 20-30% of the market instead of 2-3%, so games are distinctly less dependent upon whales to succeed. Similarly, I believe that paying mobile users in Japan were averaging in the range of $20-$25 a month (in total, not per game), which works out to be equivalent to buying 4-5 new $60 games a year, or put another way, a new $60 game every ~2.5-3 months, so it's not a crazy investment for your average gamer.

3.) There is some decentralization of the money being spent. Most notably, at their height, Puzzle & Dragons and Monster Strike were earning $4-$5 million a day. These days they're more in the $1-$2.5 million range, and the market size has increased dramatically since the time they were making that, so there's a lot more cash to go around to all the other titles. These days you have a lot more $100K to $2 million a day hits, which are all very profitable endeavors. $100K a day works out to $36.5 million a year, so you could even be averaging half that and making a financially significant profit on a lot of mobile titles.

4.) There are definitely older mobile titles that fade out. To use an example from a few years ago, when Hortensia Saga (Sega) came out, it took a fair amount of the audience from Chain Chronicle (also Sega). However, this was worth it for Sega because the two games combined were still making notably more money overall, and it's much better to transition your audience to a new game you publish than for them to go to a competitor's game instead. Some game do also fizzle out all together as tastes and expectations change. CyGames' biggest hit used to be Rage of Bahamut, a tap-based autobattle game that was barely even interactive. These days, that game is largely dead, but they have huge new hits with GranBlue Fantasy (a sprite based JRPG) and Shadowverse (a card game that plays like Magic: The Gathering or Hearthstone). Their newest game, Lost Order, is basically a somewhat simplified version of Final Fantasy XII directed by Matsuno and developed by Platinum Games, so you can see the sophistication growing, and why newer titles might cause older ones to fade out. You can also imagine why even the biggest spenders might want to move on to newer titles that interest them more, since they simply find them more fun and engaging.

5.) It's important to keep in mind that Japanese mobile games are looking progressively more and more like Japanese handheld and console games. For Madoka in particular, it appears to be a game similar to Fate/Grand Order, in that it's going to have a ton of story focus. Imagine a gamer who likes playing visual novels or adventure games with very large narrative components. They might play and notably enjoy both Ace Attorney and Danganronpa. Releasing a new Danganronpa game does not lower their desire to keep buying Ace Attorney games, it simply results in them purchasing both titles, as they really enjoy this kind of content. There's also a limited amount of content at any given time, so after they run out of content in one series (for example, by beating the newest game), they will go play the newest Danganronpa, and then repeat this process as new titles come out in each given series. Fate/Grand Order and Madoka have a similar relationship. It's just that new content for both will come out much more quickly, but in smaller chunks, so you might play through a new storyline or event in Fate one week, and then play through new content in Madoka the next week.

I hope that helps make a bit more sense of the mobile market. In a lot of ways, it's actually pretty similar to the console one, if you just pretended every console game was a service title, or at minimum a singleplayer game like Hitman.

 

[MoonFrog]

Hmmm...interesting read. Although the last bit confuses me a bit . Don't have enough first-hand GaaS experience to imagine most single-player console genres working that way without significant alteration. Makes me curious about the "becoming more console like" part of the post.

 

[Nirolak]

Hmmm...interesting read. Although the last bit confuses me a bit . Don't have enough first-hand GaaS experience to imagine most single-player console genres working that way without significant alteration. Makes me curious about the "becoming more console like" part of the post.

It's a lot like how the console -> handheld transition went, but with a few more restrictions.

When Japanese console games started moving toward handhelds, they had to take in a lot of considerations like more limited hardware power, smaller cartridge sizes, shorter play sessions, save anywhere, and a more limited control scheme. However, as time went on, the complexity in handheld games started going back up as progressively more of the console audience showed up on handhelds, while still making sure to keep these ideas in mind. These trends continued as the platforms got more powerful, designers got more used to making handheld games, and developers were willing to break some of the previously established rules due to evolving audience taste.

Traditional mobile logic stated you should have as short of a story as possible because players wanted to get into a game and start playing immediately. However, Fate/Grand Order is the #2 highest grossing game in Japan, and the game starts off with 24 minute cutscene with a 2 minute battle sequence shoved in. Many of the immediately following missions have a similar ratio of storyline to gameplay, and the plotline has over 1 million words. You will notice that the 20-25 minute mission length here is also pretty long for a mobile title. There are some shorter battle things you can do however if you have less time. You can see a video of this here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khn5TjnKVEI

Similarly, The Idolmaster is a straight up rhythm game with console quality graphics: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZIXWYeRcxBw

Here is a video of Tales of the Rays. The actual battle system works a lot like a regular Tales game (you walk around levels and pick up loot, watch lengthy cutscenes, and the battle system is similar to the actual console games with the ability to walk around in battle, the four artes mapped to swiping in one of four direction, the basic attack is mapped to tapping the screen, and the supers to swiping up on the character portraits, and you can also switch party members mid battle). To note, the first 5 minutes and 20 seconds here are a regular Tales cutscene (which is a mix of portrait discussions and some in-game cutscenes), and then the gameplay starts: https://youtu.be/f8oXJVwBQu8 (After that first mission the video just focuses on the boss fights and cutscenes).

Moving to the game I referred to as Final Fantasy XII-lite, here is a video of Lost Order. You will notice it features lengthy, fully voiced cutscenes (you will notice the player is trying to skip through the voice acting for the sake for the video) presented similarly to a handheld title, and then a battle system where you design gambits for your party while using their special moves. Mind, this game doesn't have explorable levels or towns like are becoming more common in mobile. To note, there are battles with a lot more party members and enemies later in the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HhBAi_TTDo0

 

[Astral Dog]

It's the same company that didn't decide to make a Nintendo theme park or make mobile games until at least one year later.

It's obvious it was a transactional deal between Nintendo and Mercedes Benz to raise brand awareness to help get sales.

Who could forget these ads: https://youtu.be/HumAWTYh92c

tbh thats a pretty rad ad 😎

 

[AzaK]

That Switch drop. Damn.

20-ish K is normal for Switch when there's not a big title out.

 

[notaskwid]

The Assassin's Creed crossover reminds me of when Mario Kart 8 had the Mercedes Benz cars playable in-game.

Nintendo wouldn't have needed that if the Wii U wasn't doing so terribly at sales.

They already had Ass Creed and Mass Effect skins in XIII-2, it's not new.

 

[jnWake]

Assassin's Creed also had a crossover with Soul Calibur once, so it isn't that weird.

 

[casiopao]

20-ish K is normal for Switch when there's not a big title out.

.....lol.^^

 

[Chauzu]

20-ish K is normal for Switch when there's not a big title out.

The Splatoon hype is dead. Time to wait for Mario to save the Switch, for a few weeks.

 

[extralite]

Even if you believe that the sales would have been the same except split across two platforms, not only could they price the Switch version higher, but the most important goal would have been to start transitioning the 3DS MH fanbase to the Switch. That's the most important task a cross-gen game should accomplish.

Instead, MH XX Switch just comes across as a cheap cash grab. It's not an exciting release, but it would have been had it come out day-and-date with the 3DS version.

The Switch version splits the user base, i.e. 3DS users and Switch users cannot play together locally (unless they all have a hotspot and play via the internet but that isn't a guaranteed scenario). If they had launched together a lot of buyers would not have realized that beforehand and be disappointed that they can't play with their friends.

So the Switch version would have negatively impacted the game at launch. Adding the Switch version now is less of a problem because everyone who wanted to play it locally most likely already got the 3DS version.

Also, MH is a huge franchise. Even if the Switch wasn't undershipped, at launch it couldn't possibly have met demand from MH players. Meaning many players would have waited to buy the game because they couldn't decide if they wanted to play on 3DS now or on Switch later. So less sales upfront, less impressive numbers to report. No choice = no hesitation => best possible sales.

Also, Nintendo probably wouldn't have wanted MH on Switch at launch. Switch sold games that weren't supposed to sell, like Zelda and Bomberman. Now that Splatoon 2 is out, we're back to normal. People buy that one game everyone wants and the smaller titles reverted to irrelevancy.

MH would have had a similar effect. By not having such a title at launch, Switch could report 3rd party success stories and Zelda could return to be a shining franchise in Japan.

 

[Chris1964]

The logic of a title doesn't come out -> other titles take its sales

has proved wrong so many times befores at previous launches. 3DS is a recent example. Nintendo released almost nothing importart, total number of titles was small and most games ended overshipped with low sales.

 

[extralite]

Splatoon and MH are multiplayer titles with a massive amount of content and replayability. They do take away from playtime that could be spent on other titles. We saw with Splatoon 2 that it didn't provide boosts for other titles.

Also, even if Bomberman would have sold just the same as it did without MH, would it have been impressive to anyone when the top 3rd party game sells so much more? Not having a competitor that dwarves your sales in comparison does help with giving a good impression.

And Zelda definitely wouldn't have sold as much if there had been competition from similar content rich core titles that just are more popular. Zelda sold because it was the only big core title at launch.

There are so many disadvantages for both Capcom, Nintendo and other 3rd parties, not having MH at launch was the only good decision.

 

[Chris1964]

Splatoon and MH are multiplayer titles with a massive amount of content and replayability. They do take away from playtime that could be spent on other titles. We saw with Splatoon 2 that it didn't provide boosts for other titles.

Also, even if Bomberman would have sold just the same as it did without MH, would it have been impressive to anyone when the top 3rd party game sells so much more? Not having a competitor that dwarves your sales in comparison does help with giving a good impression.

And Zelda definitely wouldn't have sold as much if there had been competition from similar content rich core titles that just are more popular. Zelda sold because it was the only big core title at launch.

There are so many disadvantages for both Capcom, Nintendo and other 3rd parties, not having MH at launch was the only good decision.

Available data don't support this theory. The more important tiles there are the more other titles benefit from increased hype around the system. If there wasn't Splatoon 2 sales of other titles would drop faster. The only problem is that Switch supply limits potential buyers but in the end legs is what matter and if a title is about to sell it will sell over time, sales don't stop at first week.

With the way Capcom treated XX, MH at launch was the only good decision.

 

[extralite]

Available data don't support this theory. The more important tiles there are the more other titles benefit from increased hype around the system. If there wasn't Splatoon 2 sales of other titles would drop faster. The only problem is that Switch supply limits potential buyers but in the end legs is what matter and if a title is about to sell it will sell over time, sales don't stop at first week.

They wouldn't have been as big in the first place though. Zelda definitely wouldn't have.

With the way Capcom treated XX, MH at launch was the only good decision.

You only addressed one of the points I made. What about splitting the user base and limited Switch availability? Switch MH would not have been good at all. MHXX also sold better on 3DS than you expected.

 

[hiska-kun]

There were lotteries yesterday in Yamada Denki for the MHXX bundle. Today lotteries again for the Splatoon 2 Bundle and the Gray and Neon versions.

http://www.twitter.com/labi1_sohonten/status/900662444984422401
http://www.twitter.com/labi1_sohonten/status/900656707017113601

Sofmap has only lotteries for tomorrow 27th (one store with the MHXX bundle).

http://www.sofmap.com/tenpo/contents/?id=tp00386&sid=res0

 

[Chris1964]

You only addressed one the points I made. What about splitting the user base and limited Switch availability? Switch MH would not have been good at all. MHXX also sold better on 3DS than you expected.

Monster Hunter still splits the userbase, what changed for someone who will buy it. Limited Switch availabilitty didn't stop Zelda and other titles sell well overtime but I didn't see Disgaea or some other benefit the same way from the lack of big competitiion at launch.

What I expected for MHXX on 3DS was that there was no way for Capcom to hit that 2m forecast without a simultaneous Switch release.

 

[Jon Carter]

There are so many disadvantages for both Capcom, Nintendo and other 3rd parties, not having MH at launch was the only good decision.

I never talked about MH XX for the Switch launch, just day-and-date with the 3DS version. The Switch came out on March 3rd and the 3DS game on March 18th. Zelda and Bomberman would have had a 15-day window, which is plenty of time.

Also, cross-gen games have existed for a long time. The idea that there would be a significant backlash following tons of buyers discovering in shock that there is no local multiplayer between two different machines in two different generations seems far-fetched.

 

[Skullwaker]

I think even if MHXX was available at launch, Zelda would've still sold the same amount.

 

[extralite]

Some nasty forwarding ad keeps interrupting my replies in this thread. I had to write it up in an editor to not lose my progress.

Monster Hunter still splits the userbase, what changed for someone who will buy it.

Like I already said, it would have created disappointment at launch. It would have hurt it at launch. Splitting the user base in itself is not good but having the game late should give people a chance to realize what they buy.

Limited Switch availabilitty didn't stop Zelda and other titles sell well overtime but I didn't see Disgaea or some other benefit the same way from the lack of big competitiion at launch.

Zelda is not a multimillion selling franchise (nor is Bomberman). MH sells up to 5 million. Currently it would be easier to achieve that on PS4 than on Switch because at least there are enough PS4s on the market.

MH on Switch is a no brainer. But not until it has the install base to support it.

What I expected for MHXX on 3DS was that there was no way for Capcom to hit that 2m forecast without a simultaneous Switch release.

I remember a week where you noted that 3DS is selling better than you thought.

I never talked about MH XX for the Switch launch, just day-and-date with the 3DS version. The Switch came out on March 3rd and the 3DS game on March 18th. Zelda and Bomberman would have had a 15-day window, which is plenty of time.

As Chris noted, those titles had legs. Saying 15 days is enough for them to reach their potential is ridiculous. Also, MHXX clearly fell in the very near launch window of the Switch.

Also, cross-gen games have existed for a long time. The idea that there would be a significant backlash following tons of buyers discovering in shock that there is no local multiplayer between two different machines in two different generations seems far-fetched.

MH is played locally. Splitting the user base would have negatively affected it. It would have hurt both versions. It's not far fetched at all and it's not a new argument to be made for MH in these threads either.

I think even if MHXX was available at launch, Zelda would've still sold the same amount.

Zelda is selling a lot more than can be expected from the franchise. Being on a portable hardware and being the only big core title both have been repeatedly cited as reasons for its success in these threads by many many users.

 

[AzaK]

.....lol.^^

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

 

[Zedark]

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

If you take some time to read the threads, you will find it is heavily supply-constrained in Japan. Since about thr start of May through to the launch of Splatoon 2 is has had a shipment baseline of 25k, with some jumps of availability, not of demand per se. Not sure if you were in fact referring to a baseline of demand or of supply, so this reply is just to make sure

 

[Chris1964]

I remember a week where you noted that 3DS is selling better than you thought.

I never considered sales of MHXX on 3DS bad. It's the G rank of a non main entry. It sold what someone would expect.

The problem was how Capcom held its transition to Switch and the crazy expectations they had for a 3DS only March release. In the end they got lucky word of mouth was good and the overshipping of that title didn't result to bomba bins.

 

[Aostia]

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

Switch sells whatever they ship
It is known and reported not only in MC threads but also in the lines/lottery topics reported here on GAF and other videogame sites
There are sites reported here weekly that show Switch availability situation, with it always sold oit/unavailable

It had big spikes only with the release of significant games, because of specific bundles, with dedicated version of the console or with normal consoles sold with a game, especially on Amazon

It had major sales also for Obon festivity because of a larger than normal shipment, arranged by Nintendo

So Switch baseline so far simply doesn't exists, in fact many here can't judge the roof of the potential sales/market interest, that has been high but we don't exactly know how much

 

[Skullwaker]

Zelda is selling a lot more than can be expected from the franchise. Being on a portable hardware and being the only big core title both have been repeatedly cited as reasons for its success in these threads by many many users.

I think the quality of the game and changes in conventions of the series combined with the success of the platform impacted sales more than anything, really.

 

[extralite]

I never considered sales of MHXX on 3DS bad. It's the G rank of a non main entry. It sold what someone would expect.

The problem was how Capcom held its transition to Switch and the crazy expectations they had for a 3DS only March release. In the end they got lucky word of mouth was good and the overshipping of that title didn't result to bomba bins.

My point is, what little the Switch version might have helped would have been betrayed by the user base splitting and low availability of Switch.

People fight over Switches. If MH fans too would have taken part in the lotteries from early on, less people who would buy Zelda over MH could have bought the Switch.

I think the quality of the game and changes in conventions of the series combined with the success of the platform impacted sales more than anything, really.

There's no evidence to support that notion. Both SS and BotW had very good critical reception from fans in Japan. If quality alone could sell games, these charts would look very differently.

 

[Skullwaker]

There's no evidence to support that notion. Both SS and BotW had very good critical reception from fans in Japan. If quality alone could sell games, these charts would look very differently.

I said quality combined with changes in conventions and success of the platform. SS didn't change any conventions and it released at the tail end of the Wii's life, when it wasn't selling all that much in Japan anymore.

 

[extralite]

I said quality combined with changes in conventions and success of the platform. SS didn't change any conventions and it released at the tail end of the Wii's life, when it wasn't selling all that much in Japan anymore.

So changing conventions is a known tool to sell games? Do a lot of games do this? Does it usually work for them?

Let's say you're right and changing conventions was a decisive factor. Why would competition from a content rich game with a large fan base not affect its sales? Splatoon 2 certainly has that effect.

Mario Kart and Mario 3D Land could sell well next to MH3G because the 3DS was widely available and they have huge casual appeal. Zelda might not have fared so well against MH on supply constrained hardware.

 

[13ruce]

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

Did you read about those manufacturing problems with mobile parts where Nintendo competes against Apple?

They saved Switches up probably for a big launch and that was Splatoon 2, Mario Odyssey is next probably (dunno how Monster Hunter XX will do since that's a port).

There are lotteries in Japan with very big wait lines, people in a line in a lottery for a chance to buy a Switch. The demand is there but the shipments can't meet it sadly due those manufacturing problems.

Those 4 weeks with good Switch sales did make me think the problem was fixed tho but it certainly is not yet.

 

[LordKano]

He's trolling. Not the first time he does that on MC threads.

 

[Chris1964]

There's no evidence to support that notion. Both SS and BotW had very good critical reception from fans in Japan. If quality alone could sell games, these charts would look very differently.

I have serious doubts SS had very good critical reception in Japan (or elsewere). The game was one of the lowest selling entries and small userbase wasn't the problem. BotW changed the formula drastically.

 

[Jon Carter]

Although his area of expertise is the North American market, I think this post from Mat in the NPD thread is relevant to this discussion:

What I'll say is that sales of title A do not, in almost all cases, impact sales of title B. There are some rare, outlier situations where two similar games may launch on the same day, or where one title is so huge and massive it sucks the air out of the rest of the market for a particular release date. Outside of that, however, it is very difficult to see sales of one game or group of games decreasing sales of another game or group of games.

I say it all the time, but the video game market is not zero sum, the more games that launch the higher sales can generally go. Of course, factors like quality, marketing, etc etc will determine how any particular game will perform. Competitive activities, however, are pretty low on the list.

I don't believe that Zelda, Bomberman or Monster Hunter would have suffered had MH XX HD come out on March 18th with the 3DS version.

As for splitting the user base, I don't believe this would have been a problem in this specific case, for the purpose a Switch release at the time was supposed to serve.

 

[D.Lo]

I have serious doubts SS had very good critical reception in Japan (or elsewere). The game was one of the lowest selling entries and small userbase wasn't the problem. BotW changed the formula drastically.

It was released on a platform well past its prime, and required a new controller (or upgrade) to play. Userbase wasn't a problem but everything else was.

In non-crazy land Nintendo held off on it and released it as a launch title for the ($199 2x360 level power, no gamepad, next gen Wii Remote) Wii HD in March 2012.

 

[titiklabingapat]

Yeah people usually have tons of diverse tastes in games. I am, for instance, is still playing tons of ARMS despite Splatoon 2 and MK8 launching. I'm not really into console shooters and MK8 is stale to me now.

Bomberman, Zelda, and MH are so different that I doubt the audience overlap that much to begin with.

 

[Chris1964]

It was released on a platform well past its prime, and required a new controller (or upgrade) to play. Userbase wasn't a problem but everything else was.

In non-crazy land Nintendo held off on it and released it as a launch title for the ($199 2x360 level power, no gamepad, next gen Wii Remote) Wii HD in March 2012.

I'm not in front of my PC to check the numbers but except there was a bundle with motion+ I'm sure it had sold so many millions that had created a more than enough install base if someone wanted to play the game without that extra cost.

 

[casiopao]

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

Up to u bro. Switch sure is bombing right now lol.

Hell, u should visit MC every week so Switch will only sell for 20-25k every week lol.

 

[Aostia]

It was released on a platform well past its prime, and required a new controller (or upgrade) to play. Userbase wasn't a problem but everything else was.

In non-crazy land Nintendo held off on it and released it as a launch title for the ($199 2x360 level power, no gamepad, next gen Wii Remote) Wii HD in March 2012.

I loved the Wii, but looking back it would have been way better for everybody to see a Wii HD release in late 11/early 12 continuing to support it with HD graphics and next gen motion controls than releasing the Switch early prototype that the Wii U was

 

[jonno394]

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

About 2/3 of weeks since switch launched have seen figures of over 40k. There was a lot of supply constraint in May an June which accounted to the sub 30k figures.

 

[D.Lo]

I'm not in front of my PC to check the numbers but except there was a bundle with motion+ I'm sure it had sold so many millions that had created a more than enough install base if someone wanted to play the game without that extra cost.

There was a bundle, but that wasn't the main issue. It was essentially like the GameCube's Twilight Princess. If TP had been released on only the GC in say early 2006, it would have met the same fate IMO. It was just too late after too big a drought so people had given up on the console.

I loved the Wii, but looking back it would have been way better for everybody to see a Wii HD release in late 11/early 12 Co tinting to support it with HD graphics and next gen motion controls than releasing the Switch easy prototype that the Wii U was

Nothing about the Wii U ever made sense, nothing.

 

[SinCityAssassin]

20-ish K is normal for Switch when there's not a big title out.

You do realize it's like that because multiple retailers didn't have a restock at the time right?

 

[Chris1964]

Zelda is not a multimillion selling franchise (nor is Bomberman). MH sells up to 5 million. Currently it would be easier to achieve that on PS4 than on Switch because at least there are enough PS4s on the market.

MH on Switch is a no brainer. But not until it has the install base to support it.

Late reply since I missed this. We aren't talking for MH5 so early at system's life but for MHXX and that not as a Switch exclusive.

Even if we accept Capcom did the right thing going for a late rushed port because otherwise it would canibalize sales of other titles, the announcement of next entry of Monster Hunter before XX coming out on every system except Switch makes the whole thing look like a fiasco.

 

[Spiegel]

Late reply since I missed this. We aren't talking for MH5 so early at system's life but for MHXX and that not as a Switch exclusive.

Even if we accept Capcom did the right thing going for a late rushed port because otherwise it would canibalize sales of other titles, the announcement of next entry of Monster Hunter before XX coming out on every system except Switch makes the whole thing look like a fiasco.

Not the first time Capcom does this with the MH franchise (MH3)

 

[VariantX]

Whenever I visit these threads and look at Switch it's about 20-25k. When a big game hits it jumps. If I'm wrong, no problem, but show me the numbers.

The threads also say that people are still waiting in lines just still trying to get one by lottery ticket at some retailers. Demand is still far exceeding supply. You could just go and look at past threads to see that

 

[Chris1964]

The difference with Monster Hunter 3 was that the game was already announced for PS3 long time ago and 2G was a new entry, XX is already released on 3DS.

 

[D.Lo]

Not the first time Capcom does this with the MH franchise (MH3)

Nah, it was planned for PS3 in 2006, and announced for Wii in 2007 before the portable side of the series had really taken off and become the main show. MHP was a surprise hit for a cut down PS2 game, but MHP2 was the one that really gained traction, and Tri was announced (aka was already months in development) only months after 2, and well before 2G which was the breakout smash.

Tri not selling as much, despite being on an at the time massively successful system, was what proved conclusively that portability was necessary for the series mass appeal.

 

[Spiegel]

The difference with Monster Hunter 3 was that the game was already announced for PS3 long time ago and 2G was a new entry, XX is already released on 3DS.

Exactly. If Capcom didnt care about that with MH PSP (which was a bigger investment) why would they care now? MHXX switch is an even lazier port than the psp games made to capitalize on early adopters and double dippers. It shouldn't generate that much discussion.

 

[Chris1964]

Exactly. If Capcom didnt care about that with MH PSP (which was a bigger investment) why would they care now? MHXX switch is an even lazier port than the psp games made to capitalize on early adopters and double dippers. It shouldn't generate that much discussion.

Capcom announced MHP2G after MH3. I'd say they cared a lot for Monster Hunter on PSP after seeing sales of previous entries.

 

[Spiegel]

Capcom announced MHP2G after MH3. I'd say they cared a lot for Monster Hunter on PSP after seeing sales of previous entries.

Capcom did wait until the important game came out (MHXX3ds) to announce MHWorld. As I said on my previous post, the switch version is little more than the late ports we are seeing from Koei and only exist to capitalize on double dippers and early adopters. Companies don't usually take in consideration these little things when planning their fiscal years and Capcom certainly shouldn't delay announcing MHWORLD for it.

These conversations about the game make little sense. Switch is a huge success, it will get huge japanese 3rd party support and main MH will be one of the games.

 

[D.Lo]

Capcom announced MHP2G after MH3. I'd say they cared a lot for Monster Hunter on PSP after seeing sales of previous entries.

Exactly, the series has been handheld first ever since.

I've always thought Vita was a platform that got screwed too. PSP made MH a star and got its best sales. Surely Vita should have been first choice for 4, just like Switch should be now for 5 after 3DS sold over 4 million for each main entry, incredible consistency.

 

[Oregano]

Capcom did wait until the important game came out (MHXX3ds) to announce MHWorld. As I said on my previous post, the switch version is little more than the late ports we are seeing from Koei and only exist to capitalize on double dippers and early adopters. Companies don't usually take in consideration these little things when planning their fiscal years and Capcom certainly shouldn't delay announcing MHWORLD for it.

These conversations about the game make little sense. Switch is a huge success, it will get huge japanese 3rd party support and main MH will be one of the games.

Still remains to be seen, especially the last part.

 

[ArkhamFantasy]

Fist of the North Star by Yakuza devs, out of nowhere.