Mr Puggsly said:
jarrod said:
Mr Puggsly said:
jarrod said:
Mr Puggsly said:
jarrod said:
1. PS2 slims account for nearly 50% of all PS2 sales, I'd say "the majority" of PS2 consoles are actually equipped for online. I'd also say the majority of Wii's aren't "equipped" to play MHG, given it's only playable with a CC (Tri can use Wiimote+nunchuk though).
Online play was pretty common on latter day PS2 as well, even in Japan. Capcom alone had a ton of titles that managed it (CVS2, MVC2, 3rd Strike, Monster Hunter 1/G/2, RE Outbreak 1/2, auto modellista, etc, etc) and even had their own all encompassing KDDI service to cover it (which MHG/3 on Wii still uses today).
2. I don't disagree, Nintendo's online solution this gen has been awful form nearly every angle.
3. It doubled class ranks, and had tons of new content. It also released before MH2 was even announced.
Really though, none of this is really all that relevant. G Wii sold because it was a warm up for Tri (demo!), and the franchise had exploded on PSP. Inherent platform suitablitiy for online play was a complete non-factor in Japan, where "online" is a niche factor even among MoHun fans.
And to core Wii game sales, TYPICAL core sales on Wii work both ways. As in they're TYPICALLY not great, and TYPICALLY not awful. They're TYPICALLY rare situations, both ways.
|
1. Well I guess neither of us can prove what the majority owns, but the PS2 online community would have been much larger had the PS2 been eqipped with an ethernet port on day one. Also you'll agree that the amount of people playing console online games has changed greatly in the last 5 years. Many core gamers missed out on playing PS2 online because they had the fat unit. Having to buy the BBA hinders many from playing online.
3. Well it wasn't a big enough improvment apparently. Because MH2 sold considerably better.
Like I said, there are a lot of circumstances why MH performed better on the Wii. You're throwing even more on the table. But the increase of online gaming on consoles shoulnd't be ignored.
The core sales have been poor enough for developers to give the Wii less core games even with its large userbase. Bear in mind I'm saying LESS. I'm not saying its being ignored completely.
|
1. Actually, considering it can house a HDD, I'd say the fat PS2 is generally better equipped for online gaming. I'm sure Square was rather pissed with the slim cutting off FFXI sales at the knees. Honestly though, I don't think buying a $30 BBA is that much of a limiting factor for MoHun, no more so than buying a $20 CC.
3. MH2 was a whole new game, and released after the franchise started gaining traction on PSP. Cute strawman though.
And I don't think you really understand what a non-factor online is in Japan, and that it's certainly not the secret to MoHun's record success (local co-cop is). The fact that an online focused console game even sold a million units in Japan is staggering, and probably something that won't be repeated this gen (unless Wii sees MH3G or MH4).
Core sales on Wii are a chicken/egg scenario, for a wide variety of reasons. Which came first, mediocre sales or mediocre support? So far as I can tell, the AAA batting average is 100% (MH3) though, which goes to show if 3rd parties put in the effort, they'll get the return.
|
1. Technically you could say the fat is better because of the HDD support. Assuming you're willing to drop all that money. But Final Fantasy XI was the only game worth having the HDD for. I assume Sony removed it because too few devlopers and consumers took advantage of it. Also, it was used for piracy.
Like I said, the BBA just isn't as practical as a Classic Controller. The Wii, PS3 and 360 would also have less people online if you had to buy a BBA. Or in the PS2's case, if only half the consoles had a BBA.
3. My point was MHG wasn't a new game. So its not much of surprise it didn't get big sales. MH2 was a new game and it received much more interest. Also, more people now had broadband ready PS2 consoles.
Its not staggering to me at all. Monster Hunter on the PSP was an incredible success. The Wii version pulled in a fraction of that. It might have been even more successful on the PS3. Who knows? I don't find it staggering, it just shows how the market has changed. FFXIV might pull in some impressive numbers as well.
The Wii has other 3rd party AAA games. RE4, CoD games, and uhh... I'm not sure where Tales of games stand. I guess if you only own a Wii, you aren't very familiar with AAA anyhow. Its nice owning a HD console, they have new AAA games every month.
|
1. Well, put it this way; you can play MHG on PS2 without a BBA, you can't play MHG on Wii without a CC.
And yeah, it is staggering. The PSP games (1) aren't online and (2) are free for co-op, while MH3 is subscription based. MH3 would've been more successful only if it (1) had local co-op as well and (2) was free online. And honestly, it wouldn't have done any better on PS3 either.
I've had a 360 since spring 2005 (the promise of Dead Rising and Lost Planet pushed me over the edge actually). You pretty obviously have never touched a Monster Hunter game though... tell you what, if Frontier makes it over here, I'll show you the ropes.
|
1. Like I said, the CC is more practical and is guaranteed to be useful for many games. I don't think people saw themselves using the BBA much. That's my opinion, you won't change my mind on that.
Doesn't matter if the PSP games were online. The franchise as a whole was already a massive success. For example, why FFXI is successful even though the other games weren't online. You don't know how it would have performed on the PS3. Neither do I, no point on debating that.
I haven't played Monster Hunter much. I'm an idiot and bought a DS. I should have got the PSP. I'm gonna definitely buy MH United eventually.
|
