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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate is a bad, lazy port.

Tagged games:

Mad55 on 02 April 2013
Chrizum said:

Ugh, I want to love this game but it's an incredibly lazy port. There are so many things wrong with it:

1) For starters, they directly ported the 3DS version, with all its shoddy textures and low poly models included. Yes, the WiiU version looks better than the 3DS version or Tri, but many textures (especially the water!) look significantly better in Tri. Why not just re-use Tri assets instead? Lazy lazy...

2) There is input lag. Just try to stand still with your character and move your left analog stick to the right or left. It takes a while before your character actually moves. This lag does not exist in the 3DS version or in Tri.

3) The framerate is not smooth at all. In fact, it seems Tri's framerate was smoother(??)

4) No more subquests. This was a vital part of the gameplay in my opinion and the removal of it entirely baffles me.

5) You can't kill Kelbi, and I assume some other minor monsters as well. Every attack, even the Great Sword slice attack, just knocks them out. Why nerf things like this? It gave Monster Hunter more depth. Now it doesn't seem to matter which weapon or attack you choose on smaller enemies.

6) You can't sleep in your bed anymore to pass to day or night. Not sure if this returns later in the game but I'm guessing not.

7) No more Wiimote controls. Why put the effort of removing something that worked so well? Another sign of a lazy 3DS port, without using Tri's features to really make this the Ultimate edition.

Anyone else disappointed by this game? I was so looking forward to it...

1) Honestly most of the assets looks better than the 3ds or wii versions.

2) lol thats not input lag idk what your talking about. you hve to tilt the analog stick a little more for movement. 

3) I have never had any framerate drops on here. A few on tri and unite though. 

4) I personally didn't care for the sidequests. I get enough of the bonus stuff you'd get as is, it felt redundent.

5) I mean why is that even a big deal? its a small side monster.

6) agree

7) sorta agree

You say it's superior to tri and then call it a weak port for small reasons. Thats a bit off to me honestly. 



Around the Network
NintendoPie on 02 April 2013
Kresnik said:


I feel you're missing the point.

He is. Although it is still true that he should play Tri instead of this.



Triwells on 02 April 2013

I honestly can't get used to the GamePad controls based on the demo
I REALLY want this game but I'm so used to Wiimote controls that it's putting me off from buying it. I was really hyped for this too



Otakumegane on 02 April 2013

Wait....there are subquests?



http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/profile/92109/nintendopie/ Nintendopie  Was obviously right and I was obviously wrong. I will forever be a lesser being than them. (6/16/13)

Izo on 02 April 2013

1. I am just glad to finally get an HDish Monster Hunter: Tri looked like complete shit on my TV.
2. This input lag you are referring to ,to the best of my knowledge, is only present when your stopped and try to smooth turn in certain directions. I have no idea why Capcom does this to monster hunter games but it isn't input lag. Its because your character wants to run forward no matter what so turning is delayed. During game play no lag for me.

3. Seems ok to me.
4. Meh
5. Capcom wanted to seem more animal friendly? Doesn't matter to me still going to carve the hide off their Kelbi asses dead or alive.
6. They made Night and Day different I wont spoil anything.
7. The combination things you can on the gamepad without having to shuffle through your inventory to do it manually is amazing. While lacking motion controls may suck, being able to make shock traps just by clicking on shocktraps is beastly.



Around the Network
famousringo on 02 April 2013
Otakumegane said:
Wait....there are subquests?


In Tri you would get bonuses for cutting tails, collecting wyvern tears, that kind of thing. Not in MH3U.

Personally, I think it streamlines things a little to take them out. And with over 50 major monsters, MH3U needs some streamlining!



"The worst part about these reviews is they are [subjective]--and their scores often depend on how drunk you got the media at a Street Fighter event."  — Mona Hamilton, Capcom Senior VP of Marketing
*Image indefinitely borrowed from BrainBoxLtd without his consent.

Chrizum on 02 April 2013
Zarkho said:
You are totally right. I've played almost every MH since MH Portable for PSP and I think they made a pretty bad job porting this. I feel that everyhting worked better on Tri.

For me, Tri was a huge step forward in terms of monster behavior and combat dynamics, not so much at the graphical level. In Tri Ultimate they have reduced difficulty TOO much, not only reducing monster's life and damage power but also decreasing their speed and removing attacks (what is particulary obvious and dissappointing in the case of Barroth, who reacts far more slowly than in Tri, making it a lot easier to kill). Also, the new monster appearances doasn't fit with the story since it remains the one seen in Tri (WTF is that firs appearance of Duramboros?? Totally out of place). At least in Portable 3rd you had a totally new story and location that gave some sense to the new monsters. Here, they just appear and doasn't matter if they fit or not.

At the graphical level it's not that bad considering it is an HD port, but still could have improved MANY things. For example, try to light the torch into the cave of Area 4 in Moga Woods and prepare your eyes to BLEED. Horrible... Also, despite monster colours and textures have been improved, landscapes still look as washed as they were in Tri, nothing to do with the colorfull locations of Portable 3rd.

You've also mentioned the removal of submissions, and I agree with you. Submissions added new targets and challenges, but also rewards. Removing them has been a big mistake. Same with the removal of Day/night cicle (wich later in the game is reincorporated, but, again, it doasn't make sense).

Overall, I'm finding it good, but not as good as Tri was with its difficult-to-difficult progression inestead of the "extremely easy-to-extremely hard" model of MHFU.

So... People (specially newcomers to the series) can say whatever they want, but this is a cheap port and could have many things improved.

Wow, this post makes me kind of depressed. They REMOVED attacks? Damn... I checked the cave with the torch and you're right, the lighting is ridicilously bad. It looks glitched, even. Even some N64 games had more advanced lighting engines. Thank god I never used torches anyway.

Also, the charm table system has been fucked up. Man, what were Capcom thinking? They completely nerfed the game.



Chrizum on 02 April 2013
Nem said:
What you say makes no sense. If you like Tri so much, go back and play it instead. The Wii U is backwards compatible.

This is an extremely stupid post and if you don't know why then it's clear you know nothing about Monster Hunter.



Sharu on 02 April 2013
famousringo said:
Otakumegane said:
Wait....there are subquests?


In Tri you would get bonuses for cutting tails, collecting wyvern tears, that kind of thing. Not in MH3U.

Personally, I think it streamlines things a little to take them out. And with over 50 major monsters, MH3U needs some streamlining!

You still get bonuces if you cut tail/break parts, this bonuses are in the lower part of trophies after quest. And for the tears you get extra money, which is nice...



LilChicken22 on 02 April 2013

I only wished they could improve the FPS to 60 for a PC like experience.