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

Forums - Sales Discussion - Media Create/Famitsu/Dengeki - 18th - 24th September 2017

outlawauron said:
Valdath said:

Just a question, did Nintendo bought MH exclusivity for the 3DS? i mean there wasn't any reason not to bring it to the Vita too.

They bought MH for the Wii. Capcom cancelled Monster Hunter 3 that was in production for PS3 and started over to make Monster Hunter tri for the Wii. After that, they moved the series to Nintendo platforms.

No MH3 was cancelled on PS3 because the PS3 was having its erratic early years and Capcom were put off by the development costs of HD.



Around the Network
Nautilus said:

About the other games, it could very well have been that Capcom wasnt unsure that the Switch would suceed worldwide.Thats fair.But MH is sinonimous with Nintendo, and since the Switch is a hybrid(so part handheld), it was obvious that it would have been a sucess in Japan.And a good chunk of the MH audience is a handheld lover, or at least prefers handheld over the console version(since MH always sold much better on handhelds).Which begs the question:Why NOT make a Switch version, at the very least on Japan?That port would easily offset the cost to make it, even if Capcom had to hire extra personel.

It could very well have been Capcom fault for missing this, because they have had their head up on their ass for quite a while now.Thats unfortunely a real possibility.But Im not discarting that Sony could have very well paid Capcom, given that Capcom makes some stupid decisions sometimes, to make the next MH not release on Nintendo, since it would obviously hurt its competitor(Nintendo) and be a boon for the PS4 in Japan.And plus the leaker being really trustworthy as of now.

If there was a swtich version it would have missed the Janurary release date. There will be a delay. Announcing a Switch port or MH now will cannibalize MHW. 

If you think porting is easy then where is DW9? Where is DQXI? 

also, it seems I was right about splatoon. People told me it will be 1:1 without bundle. it seems I was right. Also there are still Spaltoon bundles but minimal. without a doubt that is nice leg.



Faelco said:
tbone51 said:

Yeah but SFII for switch > MvCI for ps4..... So 5mil userbase > 60mil confirmed?  Nintendo passed the test, sony/ms didnt! ;)

I hope you're joking (we can never be sure these days). Otherwise you compare blindly 2 different games and think that this comparison is worth something? That's not how it works.

Like I said, crappy games sell like crap. If Capcom releases good games on PS4, they will sell well, like all the huge sellers that we've seen lately on this console. 

So Ultra Street Fighter II's brilliant then?  



"You should be banned. Youre clearly flaming the president and even his brother who you know nothing about. Dont be such a partisan hack"

GhaudePhaede010 said:

Or how about the fact that I went through all those pages and nobody even thought about the fact that Capcom would have called their Switch effort a failure and ended support for the console and nobody would bat an eye?

I am critical of Switch all the time. I am critical of developers all the time. I am very fair with my critiques. In this case, are you saying I am wrong in my assessment? Because excusing my assessment is not discrediting it in any way, shape, or form.

Why are you even trying to make things personal?

 

I don't care about your history, your usual critiques, how much you went through the thread or how fair you are. 

 

If you say "A company favoring 60M customers over 5M customers is a double standard", you're completely wrong. It's a completely logical, normal and standard business decision made by thousands of companies around the world everyday. That's all.

 

So yes, Capcom will keep releasing games on the 60M userbase (or even 90M if you take the Xbox One too, and a lot more with PC) even if some of their games fail on it. And yes, they would abandon a 5M userbase far more easily. The fact that you're unhappy with it won't change what the logical decision is here. 



Faelco said:
GhaudePhaede010 said:

Or how about the fact that I went through all those pages and nobody even thought about the fact that Capcom would have called their Switch effort a failure and ended support for the console and nobody would bat an eye?

I am critical of Switch all the time. I am critical of developers all the time. I am very fair with my critiques. In this case, are you saying I am wrong in my assessment? Because excusing my assessment is not discrediting it in any way, shape, or form.

Why are you even trying to make things personal?

 

I don't care about your history, your usual critiques, how much you went through the thread or how fair you are. 

 

If you say "A company favoring 60M customers over 5M customers is a double standard", you're completely wrong. It's a completely logical, normal and standard business decision made by thousands of companies around the world everyday. That's all.

 

So yes, Capcom will keep releasing games on the 60M userbase (or even 90M if you take the Xbox One too, and a lot more with PC) even if some of their games fail on it. And yes, they would abandon a 5M userbase far more easily. The fact that you're unhappy with it won't change what the logical decision is here. 

Then you did not read my post. Sad, sad form.



01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01001001 01111001 01101111 01101100 01100001 01101000 00100001 00100000 01000110 01101111 01110010 00100000 01000101 01110100 01100101 01110010 01101110 01101001 01110100 01111001 00100001 00100000

Around the Network
Faelco said:

"Like I said above, we can't say anything about it as long as the same games do not release on the 2 consoles at the same time."

...Which is entirely the fault of Capcom. 

" You can't use the SF2/MvC comparison to say "their Switch games sell better". For example, we could easily say that the Switch didn't have a fighting game when SF2 released (IIRC), while the PS4 already has quite a few. And that's without even talking the quality. This comparison is too fragile to be worth anything."

Yes you can. You easily can. While it is true that the Switch didn't have a fighting game, that's a poor point to make when a 40$ edition of a fighting game that's nearly 30 years old sells better than MvCInfinite. Now of course, there could be problems with the comparison. But it's Capcom's own fault by validating this comparison by releasing double-standards "tests" onto the Switch. It's not a direct parity in terms of comparison, sure. But most arguments aren't. 

"The SFV exclusivity doesn't have anything to do with the Switch (you wanted them to release the game on Switch long before the console came out?)."

Who said anything about SFV releasing on Switch back in 2016? I'm talking about any time this year - or hell a confirmation of it. 

" But saying "OMG, MvC bombed, so MH World is doomed" is ridiculous. "

I don't think, and I hope to god, it doesn't bomb. Doesn't mean Capcom shouldn't have ported it to Switch, or at least developed the game around numerous systems.



AngryLittleAlchemist said:
Faelco said:

"Like I said above, we can't say anything about it as long as the same games do not release on the 2 consoles at the same time."

...Which is entirely the fault of Capcom. 

" You can't use the SF2/MvC comparison to say "their Switch games sell better". For example, we could easily say that the Switch didn't have a fighting game when SF2 released (IIRC), while the PS4 already has quite a few. And that's without even talking the quality. This comparison is too fragile to be worth anything."

Yes you can. You easily can. While it is true that the Switch didn't have a fighting game, that's a poor point to make when a 40$ edition of a fighting game that's nearly 30 years old sells better than MvCInfinite. Now of course, there could be problems with the comparison. But it's Capcom's own fault by validating this comparison by releasing double-standards "tests" onto the Switch. It's not a direct parity in terms of comparison, sure. But most arguments aren't. 

"The SFV exclusivity doesn't have anything to do with the Switch (you wanted them to release the game on Switch long before the console came out?)."

Who said anything about SFV releasing on Switch back in 2016? I'm talking about any time this year - or hell a confirmation of it. 

" But saying "OMG, MvC bombed, so MH World is doomed" is ridiculous. "

I don't think, and I hope to god, it doesn't bomb. Doesn't mean Capcom shouldn't have ported it to Switch, or at least developed the game around numerous systems.

Don't worry, I'm really not saying that Capcom is not at fault anywhere. Their games are selling poorly, so they're doing something wrong anyway.

 

I really think that SFV is over now, they just have a small team on it for the regular new content. I don't think they would put a larger team and take the time now to develop new versions of this game (Xbox One or Switch). It would be beating a dead horse, and being even more laughed at if it failed again. It's too late now IMO. But hey, they've done weird things before, so we never know. 



Poor Dragon Quest XI on ps4, now it's almost out of the top 20.
Great Switch sales.



OTBWY said:

Yeah, I'm not going to repeat myself over and over. Honestly, i'm supposed to be the one who A: leaves long ass responses and calls other fanatical and B: gets very defensive and sidesteps with more nonsense (backing up nonsense). Have fun shouting and listening to others say the same to you, not going to waste any more time.


k thx bye.

At least I dont have to keep hearing your belief in fiction anymore.

konnichiwa said:

=p Not sure how you can defend Capcom this much.  Capcom always have deals with somehow, A Dead Rising  game for Xbox one, A Street Fighter game for Playstation some stay exclusive some are time exclusive. They were very fast porting a Monster Hunter game to the Switch and about MHW they have no interest to port it =p? They could have said like SE(DQXI) that a port to swith will happen but they didn't sounds rather suspicious =p.

Also want to add if Sony did nothing to stop MHW releasing on Switch...It would have been a big mistake from Sony and I don't believe you think that Sony is that dumb.

Im not defending Capcom. if anything they are the ones wrong in the equation when it comes to their handling of the Switch. And that doesnt make sense either. PS4 sales are tracking ahead of PS3. PS4 is dominating in the West. They have increased presence in Asia. They dont need to prevent a Switch release since their JPN sales are actually healthy for a console only device, and MH Switch is not going to tank that any time soon.

 

Nautilus said:

About the other games, it could very well have been that Capcom wasnt unsure that the Switch would suceed worldwide.Thats fair.But MH is sinonimous with Nintendo, and since the Switch is a hybrid(so part handheld), it was obvious that it would have been a sucess in Japan.And a good chunk of the MH audience is a handheld lover, or at least prefers handheld over the console version(since MH always sold much better on handhelds).Which begs the question:Why NOT make a Switch version, at the very least on Japan?That port would easily offset the cost to make it, even if Capcom had to hire extra personel.

It could very well have been Capcom fault for missing this, because they have had their head up on their ass for quite a while now.Thats unfortunely a real possibility.But Im not discarting that Sony could have very well paid Capcom, given that Capcom makes some stupid decisions sometimes, to make the next MH not release on Nintendo, since it would obviously hurt its competitor(Nintendo) and be a boon for the PS4 in Japan.And plus the leaker being really trustworthy as of now.

True, MH is synonmous with NIntendo these days. But before that, it was with Playstation. And I agree, why not a Switch version. But the Switch is only 6 months old. When MHW releases, it wont even be a year old. If we can agree that Capcom may have been unsure of Switch performance, and that MHW has been in development for a few years before the Switch revealed, then we can agree that their siding with caution has hurt them.

We can also agree that gearing up for a Switch port of a game still in active development, and without the manpower/ resources to even finish the PC version on time with the console versions, is not something that would be rectified in a coupld of months. If anything, even if they put the Switch version into active development a month after the release of the Switch, there is no way they would be hitting the December release for it in Japan. And this works for them. They can announce and get it out for consoles, and then reannounce it for Switch (with additions) and hit their stronger handheld users (especailly after massing up a larger demographic to sell to).

If anything I think there are enough reasons to show that Capcom has just read the market incorrectly. How does Sony get exclusitivty for SF (coming off a 8 million selling SF4) which sold well WW, but only claims JPN exclusitivity (for a game that sells well in JPN and not so much anywhere else)? Sony would easily have just bought exclusitivity straight out since it couldnt have cost that much more to disclude the X1 from a region that MH doesnt have the same presence, and because that is what Sony would do: get full exclusitivity. What presedent is there for them to go exclusive for only a single region?

Im willing to believe this theory if we had something else to go on except the words of a 4chan leaker. But thats just me.



NoCtiS_NoX said:
Nautilus said:

About the other games, it could very well have been that Capcom wasnt unsure that the Switch would suceed worldwide.Thats fair.But MH is sinonimous with Nintendo, and since the Switch is a hybrid(so part handheld), it was obvious that it would have been a sucess in Japan.And a good chunk of the MH audience is a handheld lover, or at least prefers handheld over the console version(since MH always sold much better on handhelds).Which begs the question:Why NOT make a Switch version, at the very least on Japan?That port would easily offset the cost to make it, even if Capcom had to hire extra personel.

It could very well have been Capcom fault for missing this, because they have had their head up on their ass for quite a while now.Thats unfortunely a real possibility.But Im not discarting that Sony could have very well paid Capcom, given that Capcom makes some stupid decisions sometimes, to make the next MH not release on Nintendo, since it would obviously hurt its competitor(Nintendo) and be a boon for the PS4 in Japan.And plus the leaker being really trustworthy as of now.

If there was a swtich version it would have missed the Janurary release date. There will be a delay. Announcing a Switch port or MH now will cannibalize MHW. 

If you think porting is easy then where is DW9? Where is DQXI? 

also, it seems I was right about splatoon. People told me it will be 1:1 without bundle. it seems I was right. Also there are still Spaltoon bundles but minimal. without a doubt that is nice leg.

Ah so it was you who i couldnt remember lol. Yeah splat2 bundles were almost non existent this week. Its not 1:1 (or close) like i/we thought. That said its still very high in terms of sales and its just the beginning. Itll sell high no doubt even without bundling but yeah you were right