Monster Hunter World announced for PS4/Xbox One/PC

[Azuren]

sc94597 said:

Azuren said:

1. A minor part of a new release which didn't affect the combat at all. 

Oh, so that mechanic that wasn't shown or mentioned will ruin this game because you heard about it.

2. For a game that depends heavily on resource management, yes it is. Regenerating health is a sign of a simpler design. 

Or maybe it's a sign that it will have more emphasis on, you know, longer stays out in the world instead of instancing back to the village to recuperate. But you just don't want to like it, so you're going to jump to negative conclusions.

3. It is possible to retain zones without loading screens. The point about zones is to break up the combat into segments which are manageable, and also to keep the action going even when team members die and respawn. They are a part of the combat. 

The point of zones was to allow the game to function on platforms like PS2, PSP, and 3DS. Doing away with those is a good thing, because people who hide from monsters by jumping zones are weak.

4. Which means it has no future as a monster hunter game. The most successful monster hunter games have always supported local multiplayer. Why? Because Japan is a moving society with limited time.

OH HOLY GEE, IS THIS GAME TRYING TO BE A WESTERN HIT TOO? I HAD NO FUCKING IDEA. WHAT DO YOU MEAN WESTERN GAMERS DON'T TYPICALLY DO LOCAL CO-OP ON HANDHELDS? WELL THAT'S SILLY, THE JAPANESE DO! Oh, by the way, I'm sure this has been mentioned to you already because, you know, I mentioned it... But this game is aiming for the West, too.

5.  I'm judging the game based on what i see and inferring how things will be done from that. I can't imagine how one could farm a monster in an open world game effectively in a multiplayer setting. Most of the time would be spent wandering and looking for the monster, and then tracking it would be tedious and dull if the intention is to farm resources. Open world games lend themselves to single-player exploration, not fast paced co-op fun. Hence the critique of this being a spinoff. 

You're jumping to negative conclusions  without even considering how they could possibly work in a positive light. Maybe there's a bunch of Rathalos out there. Did you even think to consider that, or did you just get upset that this isn't on Nintendo like everyone else who is upset with this game? And multiplayer works MUCH better when you can just pop in and out, a functionality Capcom has already confirmed. Popping in and out at will > Waiting for your friends to get back to the guild.

6. I stand by my statement. The game looks like something a bunch of interns would make with Unreal Engine 4. The shading on the monsters is not natural looking, the animations have not been improved over the PS2/3DS/PSP/Wii titles, which causes a sort of uncanny valley effect, etc. Furthermore, we see nothing of the mainstay Monster Hunter culture and parody. 

Oh, I see; you're upset that it doesn't look like a goddam PS2 game anymore.

This is what Monster Hunter aesthetics look like, even in crappy 480p. The music fits the actions and world-building well. The trailer of Monster Hunter Worlds has very little of this. 

 I like how you pulled a video from one of the single most unpopular Monster Hunter titles thus far. Better yet, you pulled it just to stand by my assumption that you miss the shitty PS2 graphics.

7. My argument was precisely that the better looking game had poor gameplay, and wasn't the future of the series. It was implicity in my argument, if you know the gameplay of Colloseum, that even despite the experimentation and better graphics, it was a poor title with respect to main series pokemon games. 

Yeah, no. You were referring to looks and posted pictures. Don't backpedal just because a single picture tore that arguement apart.