@JaxonH The rumor was nothing about health bars — the lack of which being one of MH's greatest strengths IMO — and 'westernized' tells us very little about the extent of the changes. They said less weapons and a focus on legacy monsters, which is a more important statement in my estimation.
But outside of rumors, Monster Hunter's greatest flaw is its impenetrability to new players. If 'casualizing' the game means adding tutorials and walking new players through the systems, then I'm all for it. That's just a thing they should do. An open world could obviously go either way. It would need to be relatively easy to find a monster to be hunt and to group up with other hunters, and have the necessary diversity and density to make it as entertaining as a typical Monster Hunter. Something like dens / dungeons that add depth to the world would be helpful, as opposed to just having a huge, flat open space.
@Haru17
The rumor didn't mention it, but the other things it mentioned coincidentally share a strong correlation with the typical statements non-fans give.
And again, tutorials are fine. No one is against tutorials. But that rumor didn't make it sound like they just wanted to add tutorials. It sounded like they wanted to change the game to conform to the desires of people like my brother.
Anyone who loves the series should at the very least feel cautious reluctance at the prospect of such drastic changes.
Open world just isn't right for this game, I truly believe that. Open world would mean random monsters you just happen to run into. And where would they fly off to if there's no segmented areas? How would you track a monster if you're in a wide open world? There's mechanics built on the current system that would fall apart if that system was removed.
There's a difference between making the current system more accessible to learn, and changing the current system to make it more accessible. I'm in complete support of the former... Not the latter
@Tsurii Exactly.
People were flipping out over X and that turned out to be a natural evolution of things (which didn't stop some people from still complaining on and on about styles and arts, but whatever).
I'm fine as long as the main games continue, but the people who are excited about Worlds are people who hate Monster Hunter and just want a re-skinned Dragon's Dogma.
There's a 20-page thread on Neogaf (as there always is for stuff like this) with people begging for a bastardization of the series' gameplay and core concepts because they kinda like the basic idea and aesthetics. If that's what Capcom is aiming for, no thanks.
RE6 and DmC demonstrate what happens when Capcom tries to make a successful series appeal to a broader, Western audience. At least we've got the probability of the real series continuing on Switch.
@Haru17 I feel like I'm on the opposite side of things-- the newer, more "complex" weapons are easier to grasp for me than a lot of the older ones. The Charge Blade feels simple and fluid compared to, say, the Great Sword.
"There's a very fine line between not listening and not caring. I like to think I walk that line every day of my life." -Leonard Church Jr.
The Charge Blade feels simple and fluid compared to, say, the Great Sword.
Super random and not at all related to the topic we all were talking about but...looks like someone needs to play some GS with me. It's an incredibly flexible weapon for what it is
(if you have one of those bloody Fastcharge+5 ooo charms I can share a great general set, that looks sick, with ya as well)
ahem
Go back to what you were talking about
I've tried it several times, and I just can't use it.
I know how to use it, but the gameplay philosophy and amount of skill needed to pull it off is just too much. I can't dodge just right and put myself in the perfect position to get off a charged slash. The weapons I am proficient at (GL, CB, and SA) all have different playstyles to them that don't necessarily apply to GS (closest is CB, but you've still got sword mode for hit and run and smaller openings, while GS is all about positioning and burst damage).
The biggest mistake many people make is starting off with the GS. It's a slow, powerful weapon that rewards positioning and mastery of the game mechanics-- not something you can easily jump into.
"There's a very fine line between not listening and not caring. I like to think I walk that line every day of my life." -Leonard Church Jr.
Never did master the charge blade. I learned it enough to be competent but never mastered it. Always wanted to though.
Started with Long Blade, then branched out to dual blades and hunting horn. Then insect glaive. Then the lance (specifically evade lancing). Those are the ones I've fully mastered. Learned hammer well enough to be competent, and great sword and heavy bow gun. Never liked light bow gun or bow or sword/shield or switch axe. Always wanted to learn gunlance but never did.
Psalms 22:16 (1,000 yrs before Christ)
They pierced My hands and feet
Isaiah 53:5 (700 yrs before Christ)
He was pierced for our transgressions
@CrazedCavalier If by "pull it off" you mean just getting through hunts safely instead of going for completion times, the bread and butter tactic of mostly relying on uncharged draw attacks and only charging for obvious openings is more than enough.
Being a great GS user is not so much about the weapon itself, but knowing the monster you're using it on. The neat thing about this is that you can use other weapons and still pick up experience that will eventually help with future GS usage, should you decide to. Don't be too frustrated if you feel you couldn't use it well on your first attempts. No one does. Kind of an unspoken initiation ritual (try GS, get frustrated with slowness, use other weapon(s), git gud, eventually pick up GS again).
I've played long enough to be competent with all weapon types (though I keep the gunner weapons and sets to a separate hunter) and forge elemental varieties of each type. I'm just crazy prepared that way, and I never believed in "maining" a weapon. That said, I do have a particular fondness for the explosive Gunlances and Charge Blades (I like to be complete with my part breaking), the aforementioned Great Sword (again, it gets better the more you play) and Hammers (just for the sake of having an impact-focused weapon).
Anyone who loves the series should at the very least feel cautious reluctance at the prospect of such drastic changes.
Open world just isn't right for this game, I truly believe that. Open world would mean random monsters you just happen to run into. And where would they fly off to if there's no segmented areas? How would you track a monster if you're in a wide open world? There's mechanics built on the current system that would fall apart if that system was removed.
Why? Why am I supposed to be afraid of change like you? I've played Monster Hunter 4 since 2015, Japan has played it twice as much. Those games will always be there, and XX will even be on Switch, but I want new monsters and weapons from a sequel just like when I first got into Monster Hunter Tri. Naturally there would be new hunting gameplay if Monster Hunter 'went open world,' and that could be really boring or it could be really engaging. But generally, I have confidence in Capcom and the Monster Hunter team through playing these games that they can maintain each weapon's identity and the high animation priority, satisfying feel of the game.
I'm fine as long as the main games continue, but the people who are excited about Worlds are people who hate Monster Hunter and just want a re-skinned Dragon's Dogma.
I'm excited for Worlds — which is separate from the rumor as far as we know — and I've never played Dragon's Dogma past the first area. The only thing I think Monster Hunter needs from that series is the more intuitive Shadow of the Colossus-y climbing mechanics, because the weird striking a monster, falling to the ground, and being teleported back on top of the monster for a rodeo minigame ain't doin' it for me.
While I love some of the new monsters and animations added, I feel like Cross and fourth generation as a whole is an evolutionary dead end for the series. By far my favorite Monster Hunter game is Tri, as in original, non weird Portable 3rd's dried up oceans Tri. That game had a three unique qualities that haven't been shared by the subsequent games. They are;
Meaningful environmental interaction in the swimming and diving. As nice as it was sometimes, Monster Hunter 4's climbing was never this well realized. Look how limited the game compares to its concept. Compare that useless climbing knife attack to the freedom of being able to dive into an ocean. All games without that just feel limited, land-locked, especially the ones with water that you can't touch. Not to mention — and we're getting into Breath of the Wild territory here — the meaningless distinction between the flat, vertical surfaces that you can climb and those that you can't. This only became more apparent once Cross lethargically added more incompatible old maps with unclimbable surfaces, like the pillars within the caves in the Marshes map.
A coherent world. There just aren't as many unique monster / environment interactions in fourth gen. You knew where Lagiacrus' nest was, where Agnaktor's was and where it would burrow through the ground and up into the molten ceiling. Now Gore has a befitting nest in the Ancestral Steppes, but not the Primal Forest. Malfestio has some unique roosts around the edges of one zone in the Jurassic Frontier before entering the area like Barioth had in the Tundra, but Glavenus doesn't really 'fit in' anywhere in its own zone. This is about all of the old monsters. Displacing so many creatures out of their original settings makes them feel less distinct, and like 3D models placed into an environment by a game designer as opposed to creatures living within an ecosystem. Guild quests and the Everwood were also a part of this problem, but thankfully they were removed.
A consistent set of abilities for each weapon that the player can access any time. Styles like aerial great sword and brave long sword feel amazing, but I hate the feeling of being unable to access certain parts of a weapon while out on a quest. Never having access to all of its abilities — Monster Hunter 3 was much more pick up and play in this aspect. This building move set and range of capabilities is one of the best things about Zelda games — that you can pull out the bombs, swing on a rope, hang from a ledge all at the same moment, whenever you need to. I'd like to see Monster Hunter 5 incorporate aerial, guild style, and the hunter arts into each weapons base move set together. Adept, alchemy, and maybe some of the brave moves can be specific to certain armor sets and skills, with certain animations like the long sword's adept parry being added into that weapon's base move set at a high skill level. I'm not sure how I feel about super moves in Monster Hunter. Maybe they'll feel more natural once they're moved off the touch screen. I would like the vault to be mapped to holding down the dodge button, while a tap will give you a normal dodge roll. That way hunters will have access to their full capabilities at any given time, not including the I-frame stuff.
Finally, stuff like the visual effects on attacks could use iteration. I don't think everything needs the huge dust clouds, and I don't like the huge golden effects added to certain moves. Things should feel like cutting flesh, not glowy anime fights with 'magic' in every hit. All of the shiny lightning nonsense added to the switch axe made me fall out of love with that weapon in Cross despite having mained it when I first played Monster Hunter. It's just too much visual noise to actually watch the animation play out. I also felt like the charge axe's discharge attack from 4 is a jarring loss of control. There is too much time between the button press and when you regain control over your character — also a problem with some of the hunter arts like the switch axe's barrage.
@Haru17 When it comes to Monster Hunter: Breath of the Wild, there are a few things you should be careful of what you're wishing for.
-If you want more advanced climbing, how do you balance being able to do so on anything? Let alone being able to do more than just a knife swing (which would require some ridiculous tricked out mountain climbing gear), how do you stop a gunner from just hanging from a wall and shooting the monster where they can't get them, aside from easily dodged projectiles?
-Tri may have had more monsters directly tailored to their areas, but it did so by axing nearly every monster that had appeared up to that point, much like Pokemon's own 3rd gen. This doesn't exactly bode well for enemy variety.
I like how you basically wish you had all style abilities at all times, but then immediately contradict yourself and say only aerial and guild are available at all times, with the rest being locked behind armor skills. Not that it isn't necessarily a bad idea, but complaining about not being able to do so-and-so in a particular style isn't really much different from, say, not being able to block with a Long Sword. You made your choice of what you can and cannot do already with your weapon, what's wrong with styles being the same way for balance reasons? Also, the current mounting mechanics may be clunky to look at, but it's the only reasonable way to make the mechanic work without making it broken. If you make it realistic and allow everyone to vault at all times, what's stopping anyone from just doing that over and over so that they can attack without reprisal? BOTW only allows this with Lynels, and even then requires you to get higher ground first, preventing abuse.
Aside from that, BOTW's combat system allows for A LOT of cheese, whether it be stealth, elemental stunlocking or sniping, but it gets away with it because it's not the main feature of the game. It's exploration, and playing how you want to play. But in a game called Monster Hunter, you are expected to do just that, and have fun doing it. If you slap exploration on top of the combat mechanics, some concessions will have to made on either.
Lol, I don't want Breath of the Wild. That game had the same problems of every other open world game and lost the careful level design which was the whole point of Zelda. Monster Hunter is focused on combat systems and bosses, so making a game with nothing to do but fighting the same few monsters over and over like Breath of the Wild would make sense for this series. It's about emergent moments in repeated monster fights so I can only see how an open world would lend to that, not take away from it. Of course it would take careful work, bug fixing, and testing, but even Elder Scrolls manages to have great emergent moments without a rigorous QA process.
-If you want more advanced climbing, how do you balance being able to do so on anything? Let alone being able to do more than just a knife swing (which would require some ridiculous tricked out mountain climbing gear), how do you stop a gunner from just hanging from a wall and shooting the monster where they can't get them, aside from easily dodged projectiles?
Why is the knife swing in Monster Hunter? It's completely useless, cut it. Have hunters able to climb walls within each play space, but not scale the entire mountain, etc if they still go with 'levels' as opposed to an open world. You're acting like there weren't areas in Cross that blatantly should have been climbable with no way to tell the difference between scalable and unscalable terrain. As for mounting, keep the air attacks with X, but add 'stab' attacks to A. This will have the hunter grapple the monster or plunge their weapon into its hide if they have a bladed implement. They would have to scale to give them an opening to attack the back, but the monster would keep moving normally while they're clung to it. Certain attacks could shake hunters off if they didn't hold tight with R, like a more developed version of the mini game. Mounting doesn't need to result in downing a monster. Maybe it would make sense to just remove the aerial vault entirely in the interest of assimilating aerial style-exclusive moves into the normal aerial on X.
I like how you basically wish you had all style abilities at all times, but then immediately contradict yourself and say only aerial and guild are available at all times, with the rest being locked behind armor skills.
Some things from the hunting styles will have to be cut no matter what they do, and the I-frame sets are mutually exclusive from normal playstyles. They were long before Cross added another layer of I-frame stuff in the adept evade that for some reason was different to the armor skills. Guild style and striker weren't even different 'styles,' just addedsuper moves. And I have no idea if brave, brave side-steps, and alchemy will return at all. I'd rather they just design each of the weapons for 'balance' than add this clunky second layer where you can never remember what a weapon can or can't do amid the maze of 84 different move sets. Not to mention that the styles are already blatantly 'unbalanced,' with certain weapons / style combinations and the whole of aerial style being regarded as inferior and further separating aerial gameplay from the norm.
-Tri may have had more monsters directly tailored to their areas, but it did so by axing nearly every monster that had appeared up to that point, much like Pokemon's own 3rd gen. This doesn't exactly bode well for enemy variety.
That's why they were both great relative to their respective franchises. I'd rather have 15 new, excellent monsters than a bunch of first and second generation beasts the whole community recognizes are worse-made (referring to Monster Hunter). That said, the Raths are good since they got such a big update with Tri. And it's not like there couldn't be returning monsters. Something like bringing back all of the online end bosses and hiding them in extreme and remote places in the world would be a great way to add an end game and a sense of exploration.
Uh-oh, I may be reading too much into it, but this Shawn Layden quote sounds like the Monster Hunter PS4 rumor.
“That’s super important for us. I think a lot of Japanese developers lost their way chasing the mobile games yen, if you will, but they’re coming back to console in a major way. And speaking of, we’ll have some big announcements at E3 in that precise vein.”
I'm still not complicit with the negativity surrounding this leak, but it looks like the only Monster Hunter we'll be getting on Switch after XX could be Portable Nth. I imagine the series will make its way back onto Switch with 6 or some weird version, but it's too bad if Capcom didn't put the open world sequel on Switch to begin with. And at the same rate, I am way excited for an ambitious open world Monster Hunter! Here we go...
@Haru17
At least, the new "rumor" mill on Neogaf is that Monster Hunter World would become the westernized MH subseries for the west, on PS4, and the mainline entries would remain on Switch to appeal to Japan, with MH5. That way, both east and west get new games and everyone wins.
And that movie is exactly why I'm not confident in Capcom to make a westernized MH good. They're willing to go to any extreme for the sake of sales. When you factor in a completely separate team working on it and... ya.
And you keep saying things like "want new monsters" which has nothing to do with mauling the core gameplay. They can add new monsters in a brand new game, that would be great! They can add more tutorials, they can do all that. But yes I'm afraid of change because the only direction that change is likely to take is toward the casual western non-fans. And that's change that I want no part of.
I'll be glad when these rumors are put to rest and a real, genuine MH sequel is announced. And then I can breathe easy
Psalms 22:16 (1,000 yrs before Christ)
They pierced My hands and feet
Isaiah 53:5 (700 yrs before Christ)
He was pierced for our transgressions
Yeah I'm pretty sure MH5 will just be....well, another normal MH....maybe they'll bring back underwater along with the 4th gen mechanics and all that as well.
As for the movie game...yeah it'll be crap, lol
My Monster Hunter Rise Gameplay
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLzirEG5duST1bEJi0-9kUORu5SRfvuTLr
Discord server: https://discord.gg/fGUnxcK
Keep it PG-13-ish.
And you keep saying things like "want new monsters" which has nothing to do with mauling the core gameplay. They can add new monsters in a brand new game, that would be great! They can add more tutorials, they can do all that. But yes I'm afraid of change because the only direction that change is likely to take is toward the casual western non-fans. And that's change that I want no part of.
So you decide to hate Capcom because of some random forum guess and you immediately condemn a game just because some 4chan user calls it 'westernized' and doesn't like it? Yeah, that seems kinda irrational to me. Do I really have to be the one to point out that someone who still plays WoW might not have the best taste in combat systems?
I'll be glad when these rumors are put to rest and a real, genuine MH sequel is announced. And then I can breathe easy
The rumors include a 'real, genuine' sequel, or something nominal like that.
And yeah guys, nothing about this indicates a 'movie tie-in,' of which the movie would be the tie-in to the game because duh.
@Haru17
It has nothing to do with "hating Capcom". It has to do with statistics. And the likelihood the game will be anything other than severely worse is overwhelming.
As I said before, I'll give anything a chance. But that doesn't mean I want to see that risk taken in the first place
edit of which the movie would be the tie-in to the game because duh
Let's pray that's not the case. Have you read the premise for the movie? It's like Transformers: Monster Hunter Edition. If that's based off the game... God help us.
I doubt the film and the game have anything to do with each other. Were the RE films any good? It didn't hurt RE7 at least. If the new MH is a bit more like Horizon, but with dragons instead, it's different then regular MH games, but I'd give it a chance for sure. No need to get worried yet.
@Joeynator3000@Octane@JaxonH Capcom never had the RE games reference the film canon in any way, shape, or form. Relax-- the game's likely not going to have anything to do with the movie.
Anyways, considering were we've got the most insider teases I've been pushed over the edge into watching the MS E3 conference (guy who's been calling Scorpio details left and right suggested it's appearing on the system). Anthem also looks pretty cool. MS has talked about having some Japanese games on its slate for E3. Remember, Dark Souls III was announced at MS' 2015 conference, so if MH:W is a new game it's definitely possible it could get announced within the next 3 hours.
EDIT: Especially if DMC5 is a thing. It's been heavily teased, so it's possible Capcom split up the announcements: Xbox gets MH:W and Playstation gets DMC5, but both are multiplat.
Welp, I was wrong. The Japanese games shown off were the Arc System Works DBZ fighter in the Xrd engine and Code Vein (which I already had on my radar). Going to end up watching the Sony stream tomorrow.
Liked the conference overall and saw a lot of interesting games, B overall.
"There's a very fine line between not listening and not caring. I like to think I walk that line every day of my life." -Leonard Church Jr.
Forums
Topic: Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate
Posts 181 to 200 of 1,841
Please login or sign up to reply to this topic