By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - Fez creator rants about the 3DS

the_dengle on 26 March 2013
outlawauron said:
the_dengle said:

There is no claw involved in playing MH3U on 3DS. Try it. Find a friend with a 3DS, download the demo, whatever. Just try it. It works great.

I'll ignore my 3DS and the demo I downloaded and follow your steps then. Trying it on a friends will certainly make it better.

I don't know what to tell you if you've played it and you don't like it, except that I didn't like the camera controls in the demo, either; I reversed them in the actual game and now they're fine.

All I can say is that the game controls great. It's hardly different from having dual analogue. And I usually hate virtual buttons, but this one feels nice and responsive.



Around the Network
outlawauron on 26 March 2013
RolStoppable said:
outlawauron said:
RolStoppable said:

That's wrong. The claw describes a method of play where you control the character and camera rotation with one and the same hand. Without a CPP on the 3DS, you can rotate the camera by pressing a virtual d-pad on the touchscreen with your right thumb which is nearly identical to the use of a right analog stick. Aside from that, you can center the camera behind your character with the L button or activate a monster lock-on icon on the touchscreen which prompts the camera to center on the monster with a press of the L button.

Yes. I know what the claw. I used in a sense as an annoying system you had to use in order to play the game. Did not literally mean using your hands in the configuration.

That annoying system would be the 3DS, right?

But seriously, it seems like you are being difficult on purpose.

The annoying system is only having one analog/control stick. As I said, getting the CPP makes the situation comparable in terms of controls. While the CPP makes your 3DS a little larger than you'd like, it makes a game like this much easier to play.

Don't see how I'm being difficult.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

EncodedNybble on 26 March 2013

Having not played the game, I can't comment on how the touch controls for camera controls. It probably controls decently enough (I'd argue probably worse than dual analog, but not by much if done right).

The one thing that is annoying to me with touch based camera controls is that they are just that, touch based. You block the screen with your stylus or finger for a certain period of time to control the camera. Is it a big deal? Kinda sometimes, depending on the game. In a game like MH, it may block you from seeing attack animations or certain bits of info like that. For other games, like tower defense where you plan out your layout before waves start, it matters way less. Ever notice how most touch only games have different "phases" (like tower defense) or controls to the very very small corners of the screen to not block any action?

Is it a game breaker? Probably not, but controlling camera with the touch screen would most certainly be better with 2 sticks but the difference might be smaller than dual analog vs one nub + d pad (PSP style)



VGKing on 26 March 2013
Mandalore76 said:
VGKing said:

The Monter Hunter games sold millions on PSP. There's a reason for that. It's because the PSP doesn't have Pokemon or Mario. Monster Hunter pretty much had the PSP all to itself. Monster Hunter on the 3DS will have trouble reaching the same success as the PSP since it has a lot more competition. This is why you see 3rd party games selling better on Vita or PSP instead of DS or 3DS. 

Yes, the games should be where they sell best and for Monster Hunter that should be the PSP or Vita. Capcom has to build a fanbase for the franchise on the 3DS when there is already one on the PSP. If they had made a Monster Hunter game for Vita, it would have been a smooth transition. But Nintendo stepped in and pulled a Microsoft. Now look at the Japanese market. Look how dreadful those sales are across the board....3DS isn't picking up the slack for the Vita.  This may sound crazy but the lack of Monster Hunter on the Vita due to some Nintendo/Capcom deal has hurt the games industry in Japan.

Wow, so 3DS isn't just responsible for it's own impressive sales, it's actually supposed to "pick-up the slack" for Vita's appalling sales as well?  I have even more respect for 3DS now knowing the burden that it has been left to bear from it's competition.

No, it's not supposed to but if they keep securing games like Monster Hunter ont heir platform it probably should. Everyone knows that Monster Hunter sold millions of PSPs. Nintendo knows this and its why they have some deal wth Capcom. Now, it's Nintendo's duty to bring all those people to their platform or they will all be waiting for a Monster  Hunter on Vita that may never come.

It's better to have 2 healthy platform on the market than to have 1 that's doing a little above average.



tbone51 on 26 March 2013
VGKing said:
Mandalore76 said:
VGKing said:

The Monter Hunter games sold millions on PSP. There's a reason for that. It's because the PSP doesn't have Pokemon or Mario. Monster Hunter pretty much had the PSP all to itself. Monster Hunter on the 3DS will have trouble reaching the same success as the PSP since it has a lot more competition. This is why you see 3rd party games selling better on Vita or PSP instead of DS or 3DS. 

Yes, the games should be where they sell best and for Monster Hunter that should be the PSP or Vita. Capcom has to build a fanbase for the franchise on the 3DS when there is already one on the PSP. If they had made a Monster Hunter game for Vita, it would have been a smooth transition. But Nintendo stepped in and pulled a Microsoft. Now look at the Japanese market. Look how dreadful those sales are across the board....3DS isn't picking up the slack for the Vita.  This may sound crazy but the lack of Monster Hunter on the Vita due to some Nintendo/Capcom deal has hurt the games industry in Japan.

Wow, so 3DS isn't just responsible for it's own impressive sales, it's actually supposed to "pick-up the slack" for Vita's appalling sales as well?  I have even more respect for 3DS now knowing the burden that it has been left to bear from it's competition.

No, it's not supposed to but if they keep securing games like Monster Hunter ont heir platform it probably should. Everyone knows that Monster Hunter sold millions of PSPs. Nintendo knows this and its why they have some deal wth Capcom. Now, it's Nintendo's duty to bring all those people to their platform or they will all be waiting for a Monster  Hunter on Vita that may never come.

It's better to have 2 healthy platform on the market than to have 1 that's doing a little above average.



Was that all psp had?(japan only).



Around the Network
the_dengle on 26 March 2013
VGKing said:
Mandalore76 said:

Wow, so 3DS isn't just responsible for it's own impressive sales, it's actually supposed to "pick-up the slack" for Vita's appalling sales as well?  I have even more respect for 3DS now knowing the burden that it has been left to bear from it's competition.

No, it's not supposed to but if they keep securing games like Monster Hunter ont heir platform it probably should. Everyone knows that Monster Hunter sold millions of PSPs. Nintendo knows this and its why they have some deal wth Capcom. Now, it's Nintendo's duty to bring all those people to their platform or they will all be waiting for a Monster  Hunter on Vita that may never come.

It's better to have 2 healthy platform on the market than to have 1 that's doing a little above average.

Or, y'know, maybe all those people who bought PSPs for Monster Hunter also bought a DS for everything else. Of course Nintendo isn't going to sell a single person two 3DSs just because they have both Monster Hunter and Mario. You can't account for overlapping bases, is what I'm getting at.

 

EncodedNybble said:
The one thing that is annoying to me with touch based camera controls is that they are just that, touch based. You block the screen with your stylus or finger for a certain period of time to control the camera. Is it a big deal? Kinda sometimes, depending on the game. In a game like MH, it may block you from seeing attack animations or certain bits of info like that. For other games, like tower defense where you plan out your layout before waves start, it matters way less. Ever notice how most touch only games have different "phases" (like tower defense) or controls to the very very small corners of the screen to not block any action?

Is it a game breaker? Probably not, but controlling camera with the touch screen would most certainly be better with 2 sticks but the difference might be smaller than dual analog vs one nub + d pad (PSP style)

The D-pad is on the bottom screen (that thing Phil Fish didn't ask for). You use it without even looking at it; neither your hand nor the D-pad obscures any part of the action, all of which takes place on the top screen.



EncodedNybble on 26 March 2013
EncodedNybble said:
The one thing that is annoying to me with touch based camera controls is that they are just that, touch based. You block the screen with your stylus or finger for a certain period of time to control the camera. Is it a big deal? Kinda sometimes, depending on the game. In a game like MH, it may block you from seeing attack animations or certain bits of info like that. For other games, like tower defense where you plan out your layout before waves start, it matters way less. Ever notice how most touch only games have different "phases" (like tower defense) or controls to the very very small corners of the screen to not block any action?

Is it a game breaker? Probably not, but controlling camera with the touch screen would most certainly be better with 2 sticks but the difference might be smaller than dual analog vs one nub + d pad (PSP style)

The D-pad is on the bottom screen (that thing Phil Fish didn't ask for). You use it without even looking at it; neither your hand nor the D-pad obscures any part of the action, all of which takes place on the top screen.

Ah, that's better. I was under the impression that there would be some "tap to attack" type control also, so I figured all action was on the bottom screen. Well, seemingly the differences between that and a dual analog set up would be

1) Analog input. Most people usually just go full on or off anyway stragely enough.

2) Having to move hand less to get between action buttons and the camera control.

3) Haptic feedback (you know where you thumb is on the stick just by its position, no getting confused as to where you are on the virtual d-pad)



the_dengle on 26 March 2013
EncodedNybble said:

Well, seemingly the differences between that and a dual analog set up would be

1) Analog input. Most people usually just go full on or off anyway stragely enough.

2) Having to move hand less to get between action buttons and the camera control.

3) Haptic feedback (you know where you thumb is on the stick just by its position, no getting confused as to where you are on the virtual d-pad)

I was worried about this one in particular, as it's the biggest problem I've had with virtual controls on mobile games. Strangely, I've had no problems at all with the Monster Hunter D-pad. It's always exactly where I think it is. In about 20 hours of gameplay, not once have I accidentally pressed the wrong direction. Maybe my hands are just the right size for it, but you can also adjust the size and position of the D-pad if it's uncomfortable for you.

As for point two, personally the reach to the D-pad is smaller for me than, say, the reach to the GameCube's C-stick. It may be a slightly farther reach on the XL, but I don't think it's much different from the reach on a DualShock. I can't really speak to the difference between analogue and digital input for this game.



noname2200 on 26 March 2013
VGKing said:

Now, it's Nintendo's duty to bring all those people to their platform or they will all be waiting for a Monster  Hunter on Vita that may never come.

I would like, someday, to be able to spend an hour looking at the world through your eyes. I suspect it would be one of the most fascinating experiences of my life.



VGKing on 26 March 2013
noname2200 said:
VGKing said:

Now, it's Nintendo's duty to bring all those people to their platform or they will all be waiting for a Monster  Hunter on Vita that may never come.

I would like, someday, to be able to spend an hour looking at the world through your eyes. I suspect it would be one of the most fascinating experiences of my life.

LOL.

Do you know what I'm trying to say though? Imagine if Sony stole Halo from Microsoft and as a result of that, Xbox sales dropped to horrendous levels, but PS3 sales stayed about the same. That's damaging to the industry.