darkknightkryta said:
Nem said:
darkknightkryta said:
Which comes back to; do you honestly believe Sony is that stupid to loose Monster Hunter over Ad-hoc party? Capcom reps have said pretty illogical things that can only make sense if Nintendo paid a hefty sum for handheld exclusivity. Capcom's reasoning for no Monster Hunter 4 on Wii U contradicts Monster Hunter 3 G. No Resident Evil: Revelations on Vita's reasoning doesn't make sense since the 3DS version should never have been made by their logic. On top; the rumour about the deal, the rumour about the Monster Hunter 4 delay which would bring the release date closer to contract's lapse time. Monster Hunter Frontier G being announced a little after Monster Hunter 4's release, which also coincides to the end of the contract's date. I mean Monster Hunter Frontier G for Vita could have been announced closer to the 360 port of the game instead. Plus the game's a port and could have been released a lot earlier.
|
Yes,i honestly do. I think SCEA was too stupid to know what Monster Hunter was, passed it off as a cheap PSP upscale and didnt care. And that is also why obviously MH4 already comes with online play from the get go on the japanese version.
|
Like I said, Sony Japan would have taken over if this seriously was the case. And you're going to completely ignore all the mixed messages that contradict each other from Capcom when it comes to their handheld titles involving the 3DS?
|
Monster Hunter is the same story as Dragon Quest.
Dragon Quest7? was the most succesfull part of the series but since than :no more dragon quest for Sony.Why?Is SE no longer interessted in huge sales?
Was Capcom not interessted in sales while releasing MH exclusive for 360 (both guys who bought a copy are still playing the game)?
No!-just like with ff7/8/9(it could not be released on n 64 because of cartridge limitation but on Saturn and Dreamcast)The only difference maybe that sony saved Squares ass after the Final Fantasy-Movie desaster.
