See, this would resonate more of the recent Resident Evils and Monster Hunters weren’t, as they seemed to be, also loved by old fans.
I’m specifically a Monster Hunter fan since Tri, and I think World, Rise, and Wilds have all been fantastic entries that took the DNA of the franchise and allowed it to evolve. World and Wilds have moved the franchise to finally being able to show it takes place in a real living, breathing world. To me that shows the artistic vision is very much there.
I’m not saying the games are perfect (especially on launch) or there aren’t changes people (including myself) will disagree with, but there’s no way I’d call them “barely purchase-worthy”. Especially not because of artistic constraints (and I’m very much including game design in that).
I thought Wilds was regarded as substantially worse than World. Its ratings seem to indicate as much, at least, and Steam player counts still show World as the more actively played.
So seems to me like they made one good game and then a cash grab retread of the same formula.
Because Wilds only launched with 29 large monsters and no g/master rank, while World Iceborne is a much more complete experience, with 71 large monsters(including subspecies). Ascendance launch could bring all the player back.
As of now there’s almost equal amount of player in both game.
That, and it had significant performance issues for many people, along with some texture glitches. That’s why I added that little parenthetical bit about the games not being perfect on launch. World was a big shift and also had some launch issues.
I would say that’s not down to some “design by committee” art/design choice though. I’d very much agree with issues around Capcom’s monetisation (character edit vouchers, a million cosmetic packs) and their launch model (e.g.: wait another year and have all those title updates already in). But I disagree with them being pure cash grabs that are somehow artistically stunted by some corporate process to some major degree.
Maybe they should bring back the mandatory “gather 20 mushrooms” quest though for completeness I guess.
I actually doesn’t have much technical issue when World launch on PC, and i’m using 8 years old PC back then. Iceborne launch update makes the game unplayable though. I haven’t start Wilds, still busying myself with Rise, and honestly i can’t see myself saying the old game were “better”, the QOL alone made it significantly better compared to what come before, even though i still love 4U so much. The story of the new one is a step back from 4U though.
Maybe they should bring back the mandatory “gather 20 mushrooms” quest though for completeness I guess.
Mandatory egg quest featuring Rathalos and Velociprey.
MH Wilds is garbage beyond belief and clearly shows a decline in quality of their franchise. The older MH games are so much better and its not even close
Well that’s a pretty extreme statement. I’ll admit World and Wilds are obviously different from the older games in some ways, but how is Wilds “garbage beyond belief”?
I’m genuinely curious, because so far I’ve seen quite a few people here claim it is somehow awful, but no one says why. Most of the negative reviews I’ve seen before have been about performance. I’ve also seen a few mention the game being too easy, but the end game has been spicy enough after they released some new monsters. I could see complaints about content initially, but it’s not like Tri had many large monsters on release either in comparison, it’s always the expansion that brings in a bunch more.
I wouldn’t call it “garbage beyond belief”, I think it’s fine as a game, but as someone who doesn’t like it, I can’t personally put a finger on a specific thing that makes me dislike it.
For me it fails at the “hunter fantasy” (I’m not sure how to call it), mostly because of changes that started in World (it’s been a while since I played it so I don’t have a list of examples, but one I can think of is how hot/cold environments have essentially been removed).
I dislike the lack of the previous games’ mission structure, as it feels like you are just going on killing sprees, the combat feels off due to how hitstun works and I don’t like how everything feels frictionless.
I do like World a lot (and generally prefer it to 4U and 3U) and dislike GU and Rise more than Wilds, so I’m not sure where the line is for me, but there’s a lot of little things that don’t land for me.
See, this would resonate more of the recent Resident Evils and Monster Hunters weren’t, as they seemed to be, also loved by old fans.
I’m specifically a Monster Hunter fan since Tri, and I think World, Rise, and Wilds have all been fantastic entries that took the DNA of the franchise and allowed it to evolve. World and Wilds have moved the franchise to finally being able to show it takes place in a real living, breathing world. To me that shows the artistic vision is very much there.
I’m not saying the games are perfect (especially on launch) or there aren’t changes people (including myself) will disagree with, but there’s no way I’d call them “barely purchase-worthy”. Especially not because of artistic constraints (and I’m very much including game design in that).
I thought Wilds was regarded as substantially worse than World. Its ratings seem to indicate as much, at least, and Steam player counts still show World as the more actively played.
So seems to me like they made one good game and then a cash grab retread of the same formula.
Because Wilds only launched with 29 large monsters and no g/master rank, while World Iceborne is a much more complete experience, with 71 large monsters(including subspecies). Ascendance launch could bring all the player back.
As of now there’s almost equal amount of player in both game.
That, and it had significant performance issues for many people, along with some texture glitches. That’s why I added that little parenthetical bit about the games not being perfect on launch. World was a big shift and also had some launch issues.
I would say that’s not down to some “design by committee” art/design choice though. I’d very much agree with issues around Capcom’s monetisation (character edit vouchers, a million cosmetic packs) and their launch model (e.g.: wait another year and have all those title updates already in). But I disagree with them being pure cash grabs that are somehow artistically stunted by some corporate process to some major degree.
Maybe they should bring back the mandatory “gather 20 mushrooms” quest though for completeness I guess.
I actually doesn’t have much technical issue when World launch on PC, and i’m using 8 years old PC back then. Iceborne launch update makes the game unplayable though. I haven’t start Wilds, still busying myself with Rise, and honestly i can’t see myself saying the old game were “better”, the QOL alone made it significantly better compared to what come before, even though i still love 4U so much. The story of the new one is a step back from 4U though.
Mandatory egg quest featuring Rathalos and Velociprey.
MH Wilds is garbage beyond belief and clearly shows a decline in quality of their franchise. The older MH games are so much better and its not even close
Well that’s a pretty extreme statement. I’ll admit World and Wilds are obviously different from the older games in some ways, but how is Wilds “garbage beyond belief”?
I’m genuinely curious, because so far I’ve seen quite a few people here claim it is somehow awful, but no one says why. Most of the negative reviews I’ve seen before have been about performance. I’ve also seen a few mention the game being too easy, but the end game has been spicy enough after they released some new monsters. I could see complaints about content initially, but it’s not like Tri had many large monsters on release either in comparison, it’s always the expansion that brings in a bunch more.
I wouldn’t call it “garbage beyond belief”, I think it’s fine as a game, but as someone who doesn’t like it, I can’t personally put a finger on a specific thing that makes me dislike it.
For me it fails at the “hunter fantasy” (I’m not sure how to call it), mostly because of changes that started in World (it’s been a while since I played it so I don’t have a list of examples, but one I can think of is how hot/cold environments have essentially been removed).
I dislike the lack of the previous games’ mission structure, as it feels like you are just going on killing sprees, the combat feels off due to how hitstun works and I don’t like how everything feels frictionless.
I do like World a lot (and generally prefer it to 4U and 3U) and dislike GU and Rise more than Wilds, so I’m not sure where the line is for me, but there’s a lot of little things that don’t land for me.