By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
darkknightkryta on 27 September 2013
Edit Thread
Nem said:
darkknightkryta said:
 

Let me get this right; SCEA has total autonomy against the execs in Japan?  These same execs who can reverse decisions made by their own company president?

Monster Hunter 3 G exclusively on the Wii U is a better global strategy than to have it multiplatform on the PS3 and 360? They can go out, make a game from scratch, for a company with a terrible onine infastructure, a game that's online heavy, is better than making a multiplat PS360 game?  Consoles who have a very robust online infastructure.  

So to sum up: We have an online heavy game.  An online heavy game made esclusively from scratch for a console where online is an afterthought.  And that is a better idea than making a PS360 multiplat version for the global audience?  Think about that for a second. 


Ok, first point. SCEJ doesnt have authority over SCEA. SCE has its own board and those are the ones that have authority and manage the strategies for the company on a global level. Then each of the subsidiaries has its own group of directors and manage every one of their respective areas in accordance with the strategy set, building their own tactics for their territory.

To change a decision from the structure of one of the subsidiaries, you need to have the directors of those subsidieries make that change (by feedback of other high ups from the company). Companies are complex beeings, things arent nearly as simple as you make it out to be. To force decions upon the brances without clear customer voice can also clash and cause many pride/honor feuds. At the end of the day SCEA decided that updating the software to a version compatible with capcom's game was not a high priority task and went in the backburner indefinitly. This was part of the overall tactics they have decided for the region in the US. There is nothing that capcom USA or Japan can do to change that unless they have some lobby with the heads of Sony.

For the second point. They did try to release it on PS3 remember? Releasing on the 360 is not very profitable, unless microsoft is paying royalties. Also, the game came to Wii U, because Capcom USA already had contacts with Nintendo US for MHtri. They also already had the servers from tri available to host Tri G/3U.

So, the decision makes all kinds of sense. I dont see how you dont see it. :) They obviously avoided confrontation with Sony and made the best of the resources available, while still making the product atractive to all 3 major markets. They just didnt predict The Wii U would have slugish sales for the rest of the year.

Yet Howard Stinger's decisions were constantly being reversed in Japan because the execs there had more power than him.  Do you honestly believe SCEJ can't override SCEA?  For that matter, All of Sony's studios has access to everything, even the servers, SCEJ could have fixed whatever whenever.  

I think you're the one missing the points here cause you keep on glossing over them.

1.  Monster Hunter has to be exclusive on a game basis (From Capcom).  This is also the reason why Monster Hunter 4 is exclusive and not on the Wii U

2.  Monster Hunter 3 G is multiplatform.  Capcom's reasoning is that they need to reach a larger audience so it's okay for Monster Hunter 3 G to be multiplatform.  This point contradicts point 1.

3.  The Wii U's userbase is smaller than the PS360s userbase therefore is not a platform for global audience, which contradicts point 3.

4.  You're saying Monster Hunter 4 is exclusive to 3DS because Sony failed to fix Ad-hoc party for Monster Hunter Portable 3rd HD.  Which is your speculation.

5.  My point against point 4 are as follows: 1.  Sony World Wide studios has access to everything, including servers and apps.  Since Ad-hoc party is more or less an app, SCEJ can fix the problem and send it over to SCEA for review.  Any opposition can be overriden from Japan which brings point 2.  2.  Japanese excecs have overriden people with more authority in the company.  For example: Howard Stringer's decisions were consistently being overriden by Japanese execs, because despite being president of the company and being the utmost power, japan can override him.  To think Jack Tretton has more power than the execs in Japan is ludicrous.

6.  Your speculation for point 4 is also based on a PR man who most likely dumped everything on Sony to save face.  Which, I should point out, he said nothing about Monster Hunter 4 being exclusive, only about why Monster Hunter Portable 3rd HD not coming over.

7.  My speculation is that Sony found out about the Monster Hunter 4 exclusivity before Capcom announced it and said "Piss off".  My support?  The timing for Monster Hunter's development would put the game at about 2 years exactly from announcement.  Highly unlikely they started making the game at that point and most likely had prototypes built for the 3DS, or was making the game in conjunction with Monster Hunter 3G since they need a code base for the 3DS.  All this would have been around the time Monster Hunter Portable 3rd was released.

So You're honestly going to believe your speculation after all the contradictions I just pointed out?