Zero Punctuation: Monster Hunter Tri

[milskidasith]

Why shouldn't he complain about the wii? Due to the nature of the console it is extremely relevant to any game that is on it.

In this case, the fact the game is on the Wii isn't really that big of a deal. At all.
What he complains about are minute things, the load times are long in every version of MH that has ever been produced (people saying it doesn't have a good enough processor for this type of game don't know what they're talking about).
The fact that you can use a 'classic' controller, and that you can get the game with one (which is different, it has 'handles' like a PS2 controller) makes it easier for normal, casual, or 'hardcore' gamer to use.

The console itself doesn't exactly hinder the game or experience, and affects very little.

If the game isn't
So, if the game was on another console or the PC , and it had a faster processor, would the load times be reduced?

The fact that you can use another controller means the game shouldn't be on the wii. The wii's only selling point is motion controls. If a game that doesn't need motion controls is being made I don't think it belongs as a wii-exclusive title. Especially if it'll have load time problems on the wii.

It doesn't have load time problems. The load times have been identical for all the games. The game runs just as well on the Wii as it did on the other systems. The wii has sold more than twice as well as the other systems. Putting it on the Wii is the smart business choice.

Please, don't make comments like "It shouldn't be on the Wii because of X issues" when A: you don't know about the issues (or, in your case, are just making them up as you go along) and B: you don't understand that more game sales = more money, so the Wii is the platform of choice when the game works equally well on all consoles, or at least a completely fair choice.

 

[KelsieKatt]

So, if the game was on another console or the PC , and it had a faster processor, would the load times be reduced?

Probably not. They're already only like half a second long at best.

The main purpose of the loading screens is to seperate different areas within levels, to make it easier to track a boss while fighting it. So, no matter the system, it would still be there.

 

[mike1921]

Why shouldn't he complain about the wii? Due to the nature of the console it is extremely relevant to any game that is on it.

In this case, the fact the game is on the Wii isn't really that big of a deal. At all.
What he complains about are minute things, the load times are long in every version of MH that has ever been produced (people saying it doesn't have a good enough processor for this type of game don't know what they're talking about).
The fact that you can use a 'classic' controller, and that you can get the game with one (which is different, it has 'handles' like a PS2 controller) makes it easier for normal, casual, or 'hardcore' gamer to use.

The console itself doesn't exactly hinder the game or experience, and affects very little.

If the game isn't
So, if the game was on another console or the PC , and it had a faster processor, would the load times be reduced?

The fact that you can use another controller means the game shouldn't be on the wii. The wii's only selling point is motion controls. If a game that doesn't need motion controls is being made I don't think it belongs as a wii-exclusive title. Especially if it'll have load time problems on the wii.

It doesn't have load time problems. The load times have been identical for all the games. The game runs just as well on the Wii as it did on the other systems. The wii has sold more than twice as well as the other systems. Putting it on the Wii is the smart business choice.

You said

the load times are long in ever version of MH

If that's not a load time problem I don't know what is. Maybe load times being too short?

Please, don't make comments like "It shouldn't be on the Wii because of X issues" when A: you don't know about the issues (or, in your case, are just making them up as you go along) and B: you don't understand that more game sales = more money, so the Wii is the platform of choice when the game works equally well on all consoles, or at least a completely fair choice.

You admitted the load times are long, that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

So, if the game was on another console or the PC , and it had a faster processor, would the load times be reduced?

Probably not. They're already only like half a second long at best.

The main purpose of the loading screens is to seperate different areas within levels, to make it easier to track a boss while fighting it. So, no matter the system, it would still be there.

...........I'm getting the impression you and milsk are talking about two completely seperate games.

 

[milskidasith]

So, if the game was on another console or the PC , and it had a faster processor, would the load times be reduced?

Probably not. They're already only like half a second long at best.

The main purpose of the loading screens is to seperate different areas within levels, to make it easier to track a boss while fighting it. So, no matter the system, it would still be there.

Admittedly, if it was on the PS3, it might have high definition wavey grass in the foreground. Seirously, that's the only major difference I can notice between good looking Wii games and HD games on other consoles. Well, that, and that HD games also do a lot more close ups on characters faces so we can see the HD shading, but besides those two things... I really don't see the whole "srs business" about HD. It's not like SD games look like old compressed video files or crappy cell phone videos uploaded to youtube, after all. Then again, I play Dwarf Fortress, so maybe I'm just used to amazing games coming without graphics.

 

[milskidasith]

You said

the load times are long in ever version of MH

What the hell are you talking about? That wasn't me who posted that. Seriously, you're complaining about the load times in a game you haven't played, then outright lying about what I've said. Are you *trying* to make yourself sound bad?

If that's not a load time problem I don't know what is. Maybe load times being too short?

Load times aren't long, at all. .5 to 2 seconds, at best, except when you first encounter a boss, the load times stretch from 1 to 3 seconds to load the intro video.

Please, don't make comments like "It shouldn't be on the Wii because of X issues" when A: you don't know about the issues (or, in your case, are just making them up as you go along) and B: you don't understand that more game sales = more money, so the Wii is the platform of choice when the game works equally well on all consoles, or at least a completely fair choice.

You admitted the load times are long,

No. I. ****ing. Did. Not. Please, stop the bullshit here. Honestly, I could put up with dozens of people making up issues out of thin air (as you've done) and arguing about issues they've heard of incorrectly but haven't played (as you've done) but seriously, do NOT make up shit I haven't said and try to strawman me.

that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

Doesn't load slowly, doesn't look ugly.

.I'm getting the impression you and milsk are talking about two completely seperate games.

I'm getting the feeling you're trolling.

 

[mike1921]

You said

the load times are long in ever version of MH

What the hell are you talking about? That wasn't me who posted that. Seriously, you're complaining about the load times in a game you haven't played, then outright lying about what I've said. Are you *trying* to make yourself sound bad?

[/quote]
No, I didn't realize you and crypt-creature are two seperate people.

If that's not a load time problem I don't know what is. Maybe load times being too short?

Load times aren't long, at all. .5 to 2 seconds, at best, except when you first encounter a boss, the load times stretch from 1 to 3 seconds to load the intro video.

Please, don't make comments like "It shouldn't be on the Wii because of X issues" when A: you don't know about the issues (or, in your case, are just making them up as you go along) and B: you don't understand that more game sales = more money, so the Wii is the platform of choice when the game works equally well on all consoles, or at least a completely fair choice.

You admitted the load times are long,

No. I. ****ing. Did. Not. Please, stop the bullshit here. Honestly, I could put up with dozens of people making up issues out of thin air (as you've done) and arguing about issues they've heard of incorrectly but haven't played (as you've done) but seriously, do NOT make up shit I haven't said and try to strawman me.

that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

Doesn't load slowly, doesn't look ugly.

.I'm getting the impression you and milsk are talking about two completely seperate games.

I'm getting the feeling you're trolling.

Dude, read the fucking post I was responding to before you started responding to me, I confused you with that guy. I wasn't trying to strawman you. I thought you actually said that.

Although I will never let go of: It looks ugly. Ugly enough where the only thing that could justify it on a non-portable console is it being a MMORPG

 

[milskidasith]

No, I didn't realize you and crypt-creature are two seperate people.

Yes, I totally believe that you could consider somebody with a completely different avatar, avatar size, title, posting style, and name the same person even when you actually had to go up and quote the other persons post.

Do you think I'm really that stupid?

that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

Doesn't load slowly, doesn't look ugly.

Dude, read the fucking post I was responding to before you started responding to me, I confused you with that guy. I wasn't trying to strawman you. I thought you actually said that.

I read it. His avatar is completely different than mine, so you either have a .0001 second attention span between seeing his post and scrolling down to see mine, or you're bullshitting. Since you seem fairly intelligent and have enough attention span to continue the argument, I'm calling bullshit.

Bullshit.

As for looking as ugly as an MMO: It looks far better than WoW; I don't even know how you can say that with a straight face. Furthermore... it is an MMO. Haven't you gotten that yet? It's all about playing with three other players online, and it manages to have better netcode than most Xbox, PS3, or PC games.

 

[mike1921]

No, I didn't realize you and crypt-creature are two seperate people.

Yes, I totally believe that you could consider somebody with a completely different avatar, avatar size, title, posting style, and name the same person even when you actually had to go up and quote the other persons post.

Do you think I'm really that stupid?

that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

Doesn't load slowly, doesn't look ugly.

Dude, read the fucking post I was responding to before you started responding to me, I confused you with that guy. I wasn't trying to strawman you. I thought you actually said that.

I read it. His avatar is completely different than mine, so you either have a .0001 second attention span between seeing his post and scrolling down to see mine, or you're bullshitting. Since you seem fairly intelligent, I'm calling bullshit.

Bullshit.

I don't remember people's avatars unless you're one of like...5 people on this board. I wouldn't notice if you changed your avatar to a picture of a dog in the middle of this conversation if you didn't draw my attention to it.

As for looking as ugly as an MMO: It looks far better than WoW; I don't even know how you can say that with a straight face. Furthermore... it is an MMO. Haven't you gotten that yet? It's all about playing with three other players online, and it manages to have better netcode than most Xbox, PS3, or PC games.

It looks the same to me. that's just multiplayer and online, not massively multiplayer. 4 player co-op does not make a game an MMO. Even if it's central to the game. Leftt4Dead2 is all 4 player co-op and it's not an MMO.

 

[milskidasith]

No, I didn't realize you and crypt-creature are two seperate people.

Yes, I totally believe that you could consider somebody with a completely different avatar, avatar size, title, posting style, and name the same person even when you actually had to go up and quote the other persons post.

Do you think I'm really that stupid?

that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

Doesn't load slowly, doesn't look ugly.

Dude, read the fucking post I was responding to before you started responding to me, I confused you with that guy. I wasn't trying to strawman you. I thought you actually said that.

I read it. His avatar is completely different than mine, so you either have a .0001 second attention span between seeing his post and scrolling down to see mine, or you're bullshitting. Since you seem fairly intelligent, I'm calling bullshit.

Bullshit.

I don't remember people's avatars unless you're one of like...5 people on this board. I wouldn't notice if you changed your avatar to a picture of a dog in the middle of this conversation if you didn't draw my attention to it.

I'm not sure how many times I'm going to have to repeat this: Bullshit. Even if you aren't paying attention to them, a mostly black avatar and a mostly white avatar are different enough you would even notice with your peripheral vision.

EDIT: As for looking like an MMO... I have the opposite vision of you, apparently. MMOs look like pixellated, badly compressed crap (in most occurances), while the difference between Wii games and Xbox/PS3 games hardly look different except for the fact Xbox/PS3 games have wavey grass in the background, or spilling guts, or close ups of faces with a ton of detail on the shading. Even then, I care more about the game than the graphics, if that's your only complaint. Again, I'm possibly crazy, since I play Dwarf Fortress and rogulikes.

 

[mike1921]

No, I didn't realize you and crypt-creature are two seperate people.

Yes, I totally believe that you could consider somebody with a completely different avatar, avatar size, title, posting style, and name the same person even when you actually had to go up and quote the other persons post.

Do you think I'm really that stupid?

that's an issue. I looked at the game, it looks as ugly as WoW, that's also an issue. Are you telling me capcom are so incompetent where no matter where they put this game it'll look ugly and load slowly?

Doesn't load slowly, doesn't look ugly.

Dude, read the fucking post I was responding to before you started responding to me, I confused you with that guy. I wasn't trying to strawman you. I thought you actually said that.

I read it. His avatar is completely different than mine, so you either have a .0001 second attention span between seeing his post and scrolling down to see mine, or you're bullshitting. Since you seem fairly intelligent, I'm calling bullshit.

Bullshit.

I don't remember people's avatars unless you're one of like...5 people on this board. I wouldn't notice if you changed your avatar to a picture of a dog in the middle of this conversation if you didn't draw my attention to it.

I'm not sure how many times I'm going to have to repeat this: Bullshit. Even if you aren't paying attention to them, a mostly black avatar and a mostly white avatar are different enough you would even notice with your peripheral vision.

You can't just accept that I made a mistake and leave it at that?

 

[KelsieKatt]

Sigh... Yay flame wars...... :\

 

[t_rexaur]

Yeah the load times aren't really bad at all. Loading levels takes about 10-15 seconds, and loading between zones can, as has already been said, be only 0.5 seconds to 2 seconds.

Also, what's this "only motion control games should be on the Wii" crap? The Wii is a console just like the X-Box and PS3. Not as powerful but it's there, and it can play games, so why shouldn't it? I mean, the X-Box and PS3 are jumping on top of the motion thing as well, hell, I can't take the PS3 seriously anymore after seeing the Play, it's a bloody lollypop! You can't say that's not childish looking.

Also, no one seems to like talking about the point that the Wii is the biggest selling out of the 3 consoles. Capcom clearly wanted to hedge their bets and go with that, because Monster Hunter isn't well known outside of Japan and making a super high definition game that didn't sell well because the console audience didn't take to it would ensure it would never see the light of day outside of Japan again. Although clearly that wouldn't faze a lot of people here.

One last thing. People saying the game looks ugly have clearly been blinded by all that bloom and HD shades. The game's artistic style clearly sets out to do what it intended: give the players environments to fight clearly defined monsters against a panoramic backdrop depending on what area you are in, and despite not being in HD it still looks very nice. Of course, again this won't matter to some people. I mean, I'm sure everyone remembers the X-Box vs PS3 FFXIII arguments. Somehow the PS3 version was the ultimate version because you could see the strands of Lightning's hair slightly clearer on that one.

That argument was hilarious.

 

[milskidasith]

Yeah the load times aren't really bad at all. Loading levels takes about 10-15 seconds, and loading between zones can, as has already been said, be only 0.5 seconds to 2 seconds.

Also, what's this "only motion control games should be on the Wii" crap? The Wii is a console just like the X-Box and PS3. Not as powerful but it's there, and it can play games, so why shouldn't it? I mean, the X-Box and PS3 are jumping on top of the motion thing as well, hell, I can't take the PS3 seriously anymore after seeing the Play, it's a bloody lollypop! You can't say that's not childish looking.

Also, no one seems to like talking about the point that the Wii is the biggest selling out of the 3 consoles. Capcom clearly wanted to hedge their bets and go with that, because Monster Hunter isn't well known outside of Japan and making a super high definition game that didn't sell well because the console audience didn't take to it would ensure it would never see the light of day outside of Japan again. Although clearly that wouldn't faze a lot of people here.

One last thing. People saying the game looks ugly have clearly been blinded by all that bloom and HD shades. The game's artistic style clearly sets out to do what it intended: give the players environments to fight clearly defined monsters against a panoramic backdrop depending on what area you are in, and despite not being in HD it still looks very nice. Of course, again this won't matter to some people. I mean, I'm sure everyone remembers the X-Box vs PS3 FFXIII arguments. Somehow the PS3 version was the ultimate version because you could see the strands of Lightning's hair slightly clearer on that one.

That argument was hilarious.

I recall the other flame war that started over that one game... can't recall the name, I'd never heard of it, but it was some kind of mystery game, and people blew up because the full 720p support had things like TV rabbit ears and the roll cages of trucks rendered in standard def, despite the fact the difference wasn't noticeable without magnifying the objects up so much you couldn't recognize what they were supossed to be anymore.

That's what I don't get about the HD war. It's unimpressive. It looks slightly better, maybe, but not enough that I can really tell without looking at two screens at once. The extra processing power does have a clear effect on having moving background objects, facial movement, draw distance, and facial shading, but the actual graphics themselves don't look any different to me; a tree is a tree, unless it's a pixellated early last gen/MMO tree.

 

[mike1921]

Yeah the load times aren't really bad at all. Loading levels takes about 10-15 seconds, and loading between zones can, as has already been said, be only 0.5 seconds to 2 seconds.

Also, what's this "only motion control games should be on the Wii" crap? The Wii is a console just like the X-Box and PS3. Not as powerful but it's there, and it can play games, so why shouldn't it? I mean, the X-Box and PS3 are jumping on top of the motion thing as well, hell, I can't take the PS3 seriously anymore after seeing the Play, it's a bloody lollypop! You can't say that's not childish looking.

I didn't say they shouldn't be on the wii, I said they shouldn't be wii exclusives. Also, if the PS4 and the xbox....720? are all about motion control instead of actually trying to have superior hardware I'm not getting them.

One last thing. People saying the game looks ugly have clearly been blinded by all that bloom and HD shades. The game's artistic style clearly sets out to do what it intended: give the players environments to fight clearly defined monsters against a panoramic backdrop depending on what area you are in, and despite not being in HD it still looks very nice. Of course, again this won't matter to some people. I mean, I'm sure everyone remembers the X-Box vs PS3 FFXIII arguments. Somehow the PS3 version was the ultimate version because you could see the strands of Lightning's hair slightly clearer on that one.

I don't demand bloom and HD shades. But, if a game doesn't have a stylized look like Okami or No More Heroes or something like that, and the HD shades aren't there, I'd like the game to at least look somewhat acceptable. TO me, this game doesn't look acceptable.

 

[milskidasith]

I didn't say they shouldn't be on the wii, I said they shouldn't be wii exclusives. Also, if the PS4 and the xbox....720? are all about motion control instead of actually trying to have superior hardware I'm not getting them.

I'm respect your opinion, and I salute either your super eyes, 100+ inch TV, or the magnifying glass you would use to notice the differences in graphics between current gen and future graphics, provided future graphics aren't 3d/touch sensitive/virtual reality; a straight graphical upgrade is *already* almost unnoticeable.

As for being a wii exclusive: More people play the wii. They had to make the game from the ground up for the next gen consoles. The PS3 is the smallest market in the United States, and the Wii still holds the majority in Japan. Releasing it on the PS3 and Wii puts it to the same risk of being a bomb as releasing it on just the PS3.

I don't demand bloom and HD shades. But, if a game doesn't have a stylized look like Okami or No More Heroes or something like that, I'd rather them be there.

In case you haven't notice, Monster Hunter is pretty stylized. Not to the level of those games, but it's still not exactly super realistic. And it still manages to look pretty good, nowhere near as bad as MMOs.

By the way: If you can tell the difference between 360p and 720p, unaided, how can you not tell the difference between MMO level graphics and this?

 

[mike1921]

I didn't say they shouldn't be on the wii, I said they shouldn't be wii exclusives. Also, if the PS4 and the xbox....720? are all about motion control instead of actually trying to have superior hardware I'm not getting them.

I'm respect your opinion, and I salute either your super eyes, 100+ inch TV, or the magnifying glass you would use to notice the differences in graphics between current gen and future graphics, provided future graphics aren't 3d/touch sensitive/virtual reality; a straight graphical upgrade is *already* almost unnoticeable.

Really? You can't notice the difference between a Hi Def PS3 game and crysis on max settings? I'd like the next generation of consoles to be somewhere close to, if not above that level.
I actually think virtual reality (if it wasn't done horribly) would be pretty cool.

I don't demand bloom and HD shades. But, if a game doesn't have a stylized look like Okami or No More Heroes or something like that, I'd rather them be there.

In case you haven't notice, Monster Hunter is pretty stylized. Not to the level of those games, but it's still not exactly super realistic. And it still manages to look pretty good, nowhere near as bad as MMOs.

By the way: If you can tell the difference between 360p and 720p, unaided, how can you not tell the difference between MMO level graphics and this?

Ehh, no way to argue that I think that particular style of graphics looks terrible (The same thing always happens when I try to argue mac books look terrible).

360P and 720P? If it were 720 and 1080 you'd have a point, but I'm pretty sure anyone who can't tell the difference between 360 and 720 needs glasses. Given that I have glasses and don't even need to put them on to see the difference

 

[Koganesaga]

This really has to be his most half-assed review ever. Now I'm not mad that he trashed the game, I saw that coming a mile away, this sort of game is totally not the kind of thing that he's going to like. I'll give him that the game starts out slow as hell, and I almost gave up on it myself - but I stuck it out till I hit the 3* quests then things started really picking up, and then I tried some online hunting and had a load of fun.

Sadly even if he made it to rank 3 (which I doubt heavily that he did) online hunting still wouldn't be a selling point to him, as we all know he hates games that rely on online multiplayer, despite that it probably kicks ass.

 

[chessmasterhex]

For those who like challenges and multi-part quests and strategic combat... be warned, Yahtzee gobsmacked Demon's Souls too. I was very surprised he didn't remind everyone about that during his anti-japan rant. His play-through on DS was about 4% of the entire game and my guess that this is about the same. Not that I begrudge him his profession, a one week turnaround is pretty brutal. Nonetheless ZP isn't the right venue for these kind of games.

 

[cynicalsaint1]

This really has to be his most half-assed review ever. Now I'm not mad that he trashed the game, I saw that coming a mile away, this sort of game is totally not the kind of thing that he's going to like. I'll give him that the game starts out slow as hell, and I almost gave up on it myself - but I stuck it out till I hit the 3* quests then things started really picking up, and then I tried some online hunting and had a load of fun.

Sadly even if he made it to rank 3 (which I doubt heavily that he did) online hunting still wouldn't be a sealing point to him, as we all know he hates games that rely on online multiplayer, despite that it probably kicks ass.

Yeah, and like I said, I fully expected him to not like it either way, but there are plenty of complaints to be made about the game - I mean if you're going to trash the game, at least trash it properly. Or at the very least admit that you couldn't be bothered to play the game for more than an hour.

 

[milskidasith]

Really? You can't notice the difference between a Hi Def PS3 game and crysis on max settings? I'd like the next generation of consoles to be somewhere close to, if not above that level.
I actually think virtual reality (if it wasn't done horribly) would be pretty cool.

Without a side by side comparison, the only way I can identify running an Xbox game at standard def compared to HD is that the text is blurry in the SD version. It looks... better, yeah, but not enough that I'd say "Oh! I'm playing in SD!" if somebody swapped the cables without me knowing. Crysis on max settings is just more moving objects; the objects themselves aren't noticably better looking, they just have better looking shadows and have more of them; again, it's the "shading, faces, gore, and foreground objects" that seem to improve with better graphics, not the game in general, and certainly not the major game models.

As for Crysis on max settings: Yeah, that won't happen on next gen consoles, since a computer that can run Crysis on max is *still* at least in the $1500 range, at best.

360P and 720P? If it were 720 and 1080 you'd have a point, but I'm pretty sure anyone who can't tell the difference between 360 and 720 needs glasses. Given that I have glasses and don't even need to put them on to see the difference

Just looking at youtube videos, the difference is *very* mild. It's enough I can say the graphics are better, but nowhere near enough that it's a selling point, and 360p certainly doesn't look ugly or like MMO level graphics. Again, it's not that I can't tell the difference side by side, it's just I can't tell the difference if I were to start my console and it was suddenly on SD, besides the blurry text, of course.

Graphics don't matter beyond the point that you can tell what's going on. If I wanted pretty explosions above all else, I'd go rent Transformers 2.