In my mind, it's clear that it isn't 100% a moneyhat. Capcom was likely shopping around for a way to avoid having to do a PS3 version once they figured out how much it would cost, and looked to the Wii as having similar assets to what they had already developed, so that they would not have to spend that much for Tri. Remember that it wasn't until around the year 2008 that Monster Hunter became a really big deal, well within the timeframe for when Tri came to the Wii (development-wise), so it likely wasn't really worth moneyhatting before that. Nintendo became much more accommodating as the development process went on and MH's popularity increased apace, developing things like the Classic Controller Pro, and running the Western advertising campaign. It was easier for Nintendo to push for 3DS exclusivity for the next numbered entry after that point.

tldr: it wasn't Nintendo just knocking on Capcom's door with a sack of Yen in hand, but it does involve significant input on Nintendo's part, more than they've done for other games or other third parties in the past.

Why wouldn't Capcom give more support to Nintendo, the DS ruled Japan and the 3DS is its successor, its only logical for them to trust it more.

I like how people think the only option is for it to be exclusive to one system.

A multiplatform Monster Hunter would do better than a singe platform one. Both the Vita and 3DS are capable of running MonHun. It would make Capcom more money to put it on both systems. Why release on one system? 

"Faith?" Lol. 

And I realise there was no MonHun on DS (right?)...this is simply because the DS couldn't run a high quality MonHun game. 

That said, it is clear that Capcom's Vita support is shit. But an upscaled port of a 3DS MonHun would be more than profitable enough, especially considering the series' audience almost wholly resided on the PSP - and one assumes that would be the same audience that go on to own Vitas.

It is clear that Nintendo approached them with some sort of deal. 

i got a question. So what? Im pretty sure the game was moneyhatted to a certain extent by Ninty, but it seems that some people are taking that as a negative. Hell no thats a good thing, not because it secures a game series for them(I personally never liked MH, PS2, PSP, Wii or otherwise). To me it shows that Ninty is serious about getting 3rd party support, so moneyhat away Ninty!

I don't see why it's hard to believe that Capcom themselves wanted to move Monster Hunter to 3DS. It's the successor to the best selling system in Japan. We also don't know when exactly the game started development, so for all we know, it could have been before 3DS was even released.

@Sal. Paradise No it is not clear, none have been made multiplatformal upon release, so why start now? It would obviously cost more to do so, so maybe they are content with it being exclusive.

@oniyide I agree with what your saying, but honestly I don't see why they would need to moneyhat when it's better off on the 3DS. It only went to PSP because DS didn't have the power. So in other words Vita may get a port in a couple of years but the problem with that is what else can sell it, so if it continues at this pace then it may not at all. Then again the 360 got one, which may be coming to the Vita. That wouldn't be good because it's a spinoff but I guess something is better than nothing.

The thing is Nintendo doesn't "moneyhat" in the tradition sense of the word. They were burned the last time they spent a lot of money on a third party developer after that they shied away from giving any developer money instead started to lend out its licenses as an exchange for titles. So if they did do something like that we would see other games made by Capcom with Nintendo's license. Also they have been giving real nice incentives in the form of lower fees to make games on their console much like Sony did with the PSX.

For those who don't know the company was Square after Final Fantasy V, Nintendo sunk millions of dollars in the developer and hundreds of man hours to train their developers, they did receive VI and the Super Mario RPG from the exchange but Square midway into developing VI-2 left Nintendo development and went on to make VII for the PSX.

Thank You!!!, finally someone who understands reason, So i'm guessing you are one of the few fellow long term MH fans on here then.

Till portable 4th or the equivilent I won't be paying much attention to this new entry after (the comparitive) basicness of 3G & Tri (& I have a Japanese 3ds so could buy 4 on release if i wanted) for THE EXACT reasons you mention (not being a sequel to the more complete versions)

Good to see at least Tigrex has come back though, its a step in the right direction for the Nintendo Monster Hunter games, rumour is that gunlance & hunting horn (and dual blade, and bow, sorry if you liked those from the psp versions as looks like they wont be back either) users like myself will still be disappointed by their omission in (Nintendo's) 4 as well though

@2000cc So in other words, you are waiting for a Monster Hunter Portable even though Monster Hunter 4 is portable game and not on home consoles. They could have been named that because they were released for portables while the main entry are released for home consoles. This time that wouldn't make any sense at all.