On VITA it would mean lost sales, it has been discussed that the game's appeal is the local multiplayer, so splitting the userbase means exactly lost sales, the appeal of the game is reduced.
On iOS and consoles this is not true, because the local multiplayer needs only one copy and nobody can seriously think the iOS game is a real MH, I don't think there would be a problem releasing it on iOS (as there is on VITA), because the iOS and 3DS markets are fundamentally different, but the 3DS and VITA markets are essentially the same.
About the platform, sure, your number is still pure speculation, and the reason why MH3G exists, is to warm up the fanbase for MH4 3DS. That game would not have existed on the PSP because there is no reason to release it there; it doesn't mean lost sales. If Capcom wanted to continue on the PSP, they would be developing a new game for it, but not releasing a game that is already released there with a few changes. MH3G could have gone VITA or 3DS, and the sanest decision was 3DS.
Your number is also pure speculation, and your reasoning is poor, i.e. won't sell 4 million again because it's pretty much the same thing. As I have said before, Nintendo moneyhatted Capcom, it was a smart move, there's no way a savvy business will give up 2+ million sales in order to try to do what you're saying. Capcom is in a position where they can wait until the market is more mature and then release their game on their platform of choice.
Why can't an iOS have a real MH game? Because it can have a real GTA game, a real Max Payne game, a real Chrono game, a real Final Fantasy game, a real Mega Man game, and so on.
The handheld generation is over, yes. DS and PSP are legacy systems now, neither will be supported going forward and publishers need to be moving franchises that appeared on either onto 3DS/PSV.
Changing it to "handheld generation is over" is better and more acceptable than just "generation is over", but I see the iOS is still being ignored, interesting.
Monster Hunter, like any successful franchise, is an asset, and must be managed for long-term value. It's worth putting out a single game that does only 2.5m worldwide (or whatever) if it cements the fanbase on a new system and allows Capcom to release two, three, four titles that sell 4+m over the course of the gen. Conversely, they might sell 5m PSP copies today but if the result is difficulty migrating the franchise, it'll cost them much more in the long run.
There isn't always an exactly right answer here (3G for PSP now and 4 for 3DS in 6 months might've worked out better, conceivably) but it's absolutely correct for Capcom to be thinking about the long-term health of their franchise far more than the success of any one title, and making an early play to move platforms is certainly well within the range of reasonable ways to accomplish that.
Indeed, it is an asset, and Capcom has the luxury where they can choose on how to proceed. I'm sure there were very interesting talks between Nintendo and Capcom because of it. Capcom had the leverage and they knew it. Had there not been any moneyhats, your suggestion of selling 2.5 million on 3DS over selling 5 million on PSP is a poor one from a business standpoint. You would be giving up millions in revenue and profit for "trying to set up your franchise for long term success. You seem to imply that that's the only way Capcom could set up the franchise for long term success and I disagree with that. They chose to go that route, and it probably was the best route they could have taken when all variables were taken into account. That certainly wouldn't have been the case if there was no deal between Capcom and Nintendo, I don't see how that can be argued otherwise. Additionally, you're heavily assuming that they would have trouble migrating the franchise to next generation. IMO that is a very poor assumption as Dragon Quest, for example, has never had that kind of problem. You yourself have said that the fanbase will buy the system, so what changes now?
That's kind of the point, though. Moneyhats got Microsoft bupkis. They weren't able to draw in any system-seller franchises or move the needle on 360 performance in Japan, and the only two notable titles to come out of the whole effort (SO4 and ToV) were both given significantly improved PS3 versions right away. That's with a desperate Microsoft with a wide-open checkbook casting about for anything that could possibly make 360 a success in Japan. (Nobody else in the industry has ever come even within orders of magnitude to Microsoft's specific willingness to cut co-marketing deals with third parties.)
So now, do you agree that "moneyhats will make a publisher do something they normally wouldn't do" instead of "moneyhats will do something that a publisher was already considering doing and will just push them in that direction"?
Monster Hunter is now, over the course of a generation, something like a billion dollar franchise. The plausible amounts of money a platform-holder can spend are not actually very large at all in comparison. If Capcom expects to make an extra $300m over the course of the generation by picking a specific platform or moving at a specific time, Sony can't possibly offset that.
I never suggested Sony would pay $300m for an exclusive MH on Vita. That would be a horrible business move. I'm sure you don't think Nintendo paid Capcom $300m in cash for exclusivity on MH and I'm fairly positive that securing a MH game on Vita would cost a lot less than $300m. Maybe Sony does not want to pay, or maybe the price will be too high for what the executives deem worthy, as they could have paid to secure a DQ spin off on playstation over the past decade and didn't. That goes back to Yoshida or Hirai wanting to write that check.
When I say "niche developers" I'm talking about a) in Japan and b) games that sell 50-200k at retail prices right now, not $1 ultra-indie stuff -- Nippon Ichi and the like.
I apologize as I misread that as indie developers. I think this is just as bad, if not worse though. SCE has plenty of western games that would be considered niche in Japan like Uncharted and GOW. Those games and something like Disgaea are not what is gonna sell the Vita in Japan. 360 has plenty of exclusive niche titles in Japan, I'm sure you know how well it's doing there.
No, they don't, which is part of why people have been saying Sony had a hard hill to climb in Japan for years now. I agree that Sony's in a tough spot on this, I just don't think they have very many outs.
I didn't say that; I said that Sony has somewhere between a very slim chance and no chance whatsoever to get most of those franchises on their system, so focusing on building up a wide library of smaller titles (and hoping to find another breakout hit somewhere in the process) is their best available bet.
I agree that they are in a tough spot, but I will agree to disagree with you here that their best option is niche titles. Besides hardcore fans, who in their right mind would pay $250+$50 MC to play Disgaea and Atellier? Hell I will even include Persona there. The "slim chance" you speak of is fully dependent on the willingness of the executives to pay the price. Admittedly that willingness might not be high, but that's their best option IMO.
Why would they do that? Monster Hunter is the single biggest franchise in Japan. They're a kingmaker. Within remotely reasonable bounds, the platform they pick will succeed just by virtue of having MH on it. Capcom has the advantage here; they can afford to look at the online infrastructure, development costs, licensing arrangement, likely regional success outside of Japan, or whatever else they want about each platform and make a decision solely on those factors because their franchise will do well with either choice.
I agree, so they would do it because they can. Like Horii and DQ, they have that luxury of waiting and seeing what the best option is for their franchise. They do not have to hurry to ensure success of one platform or another. This paragraph here made the argument on why they would wait for me.