By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Monster Hunter XX Switch coming west as Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate

fuck capcom



Around the Network
StuOhQ said:
Pavolink said:
I'm surprised. Honestly.

The crazy thing is I am too. This should have been a given.

I just hope that Capcom doesn't do something insane like split the game into half-cart/half-digital for no apparent reason.

It's Capcom. 3/4 of the game will surely be mandatory download.



You know it deserves the GOTY.

Come join The 2018 Obscure Game Monthly Review Thread.

Meh, a 3ds game and it's still 30fps, this was and still is a lazy port by Capcom.

Obviously it's good news it's coming west though.



Funny how we went from Monster Hunter IV to Monster Hunter XX.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

KLXVER said:

Well gamers in NA and Europe that want Capcom to keep releasing MH on Nintendo platforms really have to support this title. MHW has done incredible on other platforms, so this might be the only MH game youll see on a Nintendo platform in a long time if it doesn't sell well.

Capcom had no idea how well the Switch would sell when they were working on World. With the huge sales, portability and its popularity in Japan, I don't think we need to worry about them bringing future MH to the Switch in some form.



Around the Network
Barkley said:
Meh, a 3ds game and it's still 30fps, this was and still is a lazy port by Capcom.

Obviously it's good news it's coming west though.

Honestly it's a pretty solid port it's just held back by 3ds cross play. In terms of what they could have done to improve it in spite of the limitations placed on it they really could not have done much better. 



Darwinianevolution said:
StuOhQ said:

The crazy thing is I am too. This should have been a given.

I just hope that Capcom doesn't do something insane like split the game into half-cart/half-digital for no apparent reason.

It's Capcom. 3/4 of the game will surely be mandatory download.

Sad but true...



Retro Tech Select - My Youtube channel. Covers throwback consumer electronics with a focus on "vid'ya games."

Latest Video: Top 12: Best Games on the N64 - Special Features, Episode 7

Nuvendil said:
DonFerrari said:

Are you talking about people that were accusing Sony of paying for the game to show not in Nintendo while appearing in other systems but not accusing Nintendo of paying for excluvity of this game on Switch?

I'm saying every time Capcom pulls the arbitrary exclusivity BS or shafts one fanbase, the people who get the goodies celebrate while the other side calls it anticonsumer BS, which it is.  Then, when the shoe is inevitably on the other foot because Capcom is a massive whore, the roles suddenly reverse with those selfishly celebrating the actions are suddenly enlightened and those  once enlightened suddenly start celebrating.  

 

Facts are facts:  Capcom shafted Switch owners on MonHun, shafted PS4 owners on Dead Rising, and shafted everyone but Sony with Street Fighter and it was bullshit every. single. time.

Glad we cleared that. But for me Capcom took the strategy that would generate more profit and aligned with their strategy for each game.

MHW wouldn't run ok on Switch, so no Switch version.

SF V they wouldn't have the funds to develop the game until a lot later, so Sony payment allowed them a lot earlier.

This MH wouldn't sell much outside of Switch because of MHW been release very soon and this being a lot "lower" instalment.

MS paid a lot for DR so they got it, perfectly fine.

Hipocrisy should be hold for false accusations without any evidence.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
Nuvendil said:

I'm saying every time Capcom pulls the arbitrary exclusivity BS or shafts one fanbase, the people who get the goodies celebrate while the other side calls it anticonsumer BS, which it is.  Then, when the shoe is inevitably on the other foot because Capcom is a massive whore, the roles suddenly reverse with those selfishly celebrating the actions are suddenly enlightened and those  once enlightened suddenly start celebrating.  

 

Facts are facts:  Capcom shafted Switch owners on MonHun, shafted PS4 owners on Dead Rising, and shafted everyone but Sony with Street Fighter and it was bullshit every. single. time.

Glad we cleared that. But for me Capcom took the strategy that would generate more profit and aligned with their strategy for each game.

MHW wouldn't run ok on Switch, so no Switch version.

SF V they wouldn't have the funds to develop the game until a lot later, so Sony payment allowed them a lot earlier.

This MH wouldn't sell much outside of Switch because of MHW been release very soon and this being a lot "lower" instalment.

MS paid a lot for DR so they got it, perfectly fine.

Hipocrisy should be hold for false accusations without any evidence.

That Street Fighter V story is a crock, it was a straight money hat.  You think SF, one of the most lucrative franchises Capcom has, wasn't going to get a new entry in a relatively timely manner?  They were just hoping to use that line to dodge the PR fallout.  And the funds didn't help finish it, it just motivated them to launch it unfinished.

The DR thing wouldn't be a big deal if it was an MS co-owned IP and not a multiplat one that Capcom just auctions off to the highest bidder whenever they want to pad their bank account.

MHW situation would be somewhat understandable if Capcom hadn't been *massive* dicks and delayed the localization of XX and even denied it was coming over purely to shine a spotlight on World to the detriment of a large consumerbase.  I get it, the Switch's success caught them with their trousers down, somewhat understandable if a bit embarrassing given their success on 3DS.  But to deliberately delay the launch of XX in the west so that they can keep a spotlight on World, thus shafting an entire consumer base in the process.  That's just a massive dick move.  Imagine if it were the other way round, and they refused to localize World so they could hype up XX and gave the entire western audience on PS the finger.

And as for World not running on Switch, having played it in person, I have my doubts.  It depends on the efficiency and scalability of the engine, but I think it could absolutely deliver a satisfactory experience. Capcom just can't be assed.  



DonFerrari said:
Nuvendil said:

I'm saying every time Capcom pulls the arbitrary exclusivity BS or shafts one fanbase, the people who get the goodies celebrate while the other side calls it anticonsumer BS, which it is.  Then, when the shoe is inevitably on the other foot because Capcom is a massive whore, the roles suddenly reverse with those selfishly celebrating the actions are suddenly enlightened and those  once enlightened suddenly start celebrating.  

 

Facts are facts:  Capcom shafted Switch owners on MonHun, shafted PS4 owners on Dead Rising, and shafted everyone but Sony with Street Fighter and it was bullshit every. single. time.

Glad we cleared that. But for me Capcom took the strategy that would generate more profit and aligned with their strategy for each game.

MHW wouldn't run ok on Switch, so no Switch version.

SF V they wouldn't have the funds to develop the game until a lot later, so Sony payment allowed them a lot earlier.

This MH wouldn't sell much outside of Switch because of MHW been release very soon and this being a lot "lower" instalment.

MS paid a lot for DR so they got it, perfectly fine.

Hipocrisy should be hold for false accusations without any evidence.

Street Fighter IV and its many iterations have sold around 9 million physical copies according VGC. I very much doubt they did not have the funds or intentions on doing a sequel. Mind you I am in the camp that believes even Sony got shafted with SF V, considering they paid for it and Capcom under-delivered (well I mean the core mechanics and game were solid, but it was missing a lot of content at the beginning).