| jarrod said:
Actually, Monster Hunter is almost exactly like Animal Crossing in sales patterns. The two are really very comparable, only console AC didn't have the same sort of impediment console MH does (ie: you don't have to pay $8 a month to play with your friends). I'm curious why exactly you think the switch to handheld would allow AC "to explode" and not MH, when the core thrust of MH is local multiplayer? If anything, I'd say AC is less naturally suited to handhelds than MH is (as it's really a less social game), despite the comparably explosive sales both have seen on the formats. There's no article about subscription targets, Capcom mentioned it in one of their quarterly reports so you'll have to go digging on their IR site (it's all in english). They basically said subscription revenues exceeded expectations, no hard numbers were given. And I don't think you quite get it, there's no "reasons for underperforming" when it comes to MH3, because it quite literally did not underperform. It's an unqualified success, it met it's sales targets, exceeded subscription targets, broke sales records in Japan for a subscription based game, and sits as one of the few series this generation than claim to have sold more on a current home console than it did on PS2. It's Capcom's best selling console exclusive this gen, and the only one that's going to pass 2m worldwide... if that's not "success", what is? |
My point was that Monster Hunter was a growing series that continued growing on portables. People always like to say it was the best selling console MH as if there had been numerous console versions that couldn't break a sales barrier. If the situation were identical except it was the PS2 32 months in instead of the Wii, do you think it would have topped out at ~1 million?
Also the sales targets were 2 million by the end of the fiscal year (March 31, 2010). I'm not sure if it was official or just speculated, but it was generally seen as 1.5 million in Japan and 500k in the west. Now obviously it got delayed so the western release missed the fiscal year, but it's safe to say the lifetime sales were below expectations. To be fair capcom was particularly terrible with their expectations last year, but I wouldn't say their Tri number was too outrageous. Do you really think Capcom was completely happy investing all that money in Tri only for it to be outsold by 2G a mere 7 weeks in.
Back in 2007 when Tri made the switch to Wii Capcom said "We believe that by bringing the Monster Hunter series to multiple platforms, it will help the franchise reach an even-greater number of users eager for its unique gameplay." They also cited high PS3 development costs as a reason for the switch. In your honest opinion if Capcom could go back in time and make the decision again, would they stick with the Wii or go with the PSP?
It also seems a bit odd to call it an "unqualified success" when these arguments always abound with comments like.
Best selling console Monster Hunter.
Highest sales for a subscription based game in Japan.
Second largest console game this generation not published by Nintendo in Japan.
