Monster Hunter Tri

Anaklusmos

New member
Jun 1, 2010
283
0
0
NoblePhilistineFox said:
Anaklusmos said:
I just snipped you, that must hurt T_T
its a matter of oppinion,
just because someone sais youre right doesnt mean you are.
you can hate it if you want, just dont be haughty and talk down to others because we have a different oppinion.
besides, Great Jaggi sucks, Gigginox for life.

OT:
thats was funny as hell.
although the tutorial didnt take 10 hours, only took me like 2...
but that still is alot for a tutorial ill admit.
I didnt even pay attention the the text though, because I have this nifty little thing called "instruction manual" that gives me the same information in less then 5 minutes.

also, I wonder how many people are gonna say things like "it gets better with cha-cha"
or "get to the rathian and it will get funner"
well ill tell you somehing, THAT LITTLE CHA-CHA FREAK TAKES THE FUN OUT OF THE GAME!!!!
and the rathian crosses that line between "difficult" and "glass in your urine"
solo-ing the Lagiacrus is easier for f**ks sake.
thats my little rant on the subject ^_^
You seem to have taken everything I have said the wrong way.

For starters, I was saying I was right, because people were raging because Yahtzee had supposedly played for only two hours, while I said that maybe he had played for longer, but didn't want to talk about his other experiences with the game. Right, got that sorted out? Now to talk about the other points in your post where you assume things about me.

I was never hating, I was trying to give reasonable arguments to stop people from typing while going balistic and saying "You've never played more than two hours, your shit at your job, we deserve better", I was trying to make them see another perspective.

I don't have an opinion on this game, so I don't know why you would bring up my opinion, never played this game never will.
 

Liberaliter

New member
Sep 17, 2008
1,370
0
0
PaulH said:
Liberaliter said:
Oh come on! Are you being serious? Why are you taking his review so seriously, it's Yahtzee for christ sake, he is a game critic who craps on games for comedy - it's what he does and what makes him popular. Do you actually care what he thinks of the game, there's no point getting so angry about it is there?
You're right, but I am concerned by the number of people who actually think he's right. I'm sick and tired of people like him who jump onto the bandwagon and berate what is essentially a good game by focusing on things that are ;

A: either nonexistent problems and misconceptions

B: Things that should NEVER be objectives in videogames (i.e a steller storyline ... because it will never be accomplished in this medium)

Is the Monster Hunter series different from everything else on the market? Yes. Is it challenging? Well yes and no, challenging if you're an idiot. Is it challenging compared to the rest of the crap on the market? Yes ...

If people actually tried the game they'd realize that Yahtzee is a complete noob whose points he decries are non-issues for the grand majority of gamers.

Call me prehistoric but I remember when games were fun. And if Yahtzee's ideas of an awesome game are, God help us if it comes to this, actually taken onboard by game developers I will have lost everything I love about video games. We will have a whole video game market that delivers nothing but an hour worth of gameplay that is only fun in comparisoin to sticking needles under our fingernails with no ability to challenge others in that pursuit of being as good at the game as possible.

Am I the only one who fears this?
In that case, I agree. I hate how after every review he does there are loads of people in the comments saying things like, "Wow, thanks Yahtzee, now I know not to buy that game!" etc.

From the TvTropes article on Zero Punctuation -

"Creator Worship: About as prevalent as He Panned It Now He Sucks, as noted below - possibly more so. The first twenty posts on any given review will be something along the lines of "Well I'm sure as hell not going to play the game now that you've panned it, but you're dead on in your criticisms as always!" "

"# Fan Dumb /Hatedom: Take a moment and read through any given one of The Escapist forum threads about a video of his or an Extra Punctuation. Every single one contains the following ad nauseum in no particular order: "Good one Yahtzee, this game looks like the butt." "Your opinion on this is stupid because you didn't review it right/review enough of it/play it correctly/play or talk about the right aspect of it/are stupid." "Shut up, fanboy. He can hate it." "No you, Yahtzee fanboy." "Yes, it couldn't be that I might just regular agree with him." "No, you're a fanboy sheep/drone/other term for mindless follower." "No, you!" "You!" "You guys are so stupid for taking him seriously. He's a comedian." "But he said this and this and this and is an arrogant jerk." "Hi. Here are my thoughts on the review and the discussion at hand laid out in such a way as to add to the conversation without being a total asshole." That last person is almost always ignored.

* Whatever you thought of his review of Smash Bros. Brawl, you've got to admire the stones of someone who begs Yahtzee to do a game he already said he wasn't interested in, and then complains when he bashes it.
* There are a great deal of people who simply parrot Yahtzee's views on a game, even when Yahtzee has stated that this view is fucking stupid.
* Then you get to people vehemently flaming parody videos.
o Getting fond memories of people that went berserk over Yahtzee making a one line quip about a video which reviewed Art of Theft.
o Specifically, that Yahtzee wanted to burn the guy's house down. Yahtzee fanboys took this a wee bit too seriously. Yahtzee later said that it was a good review, but he was just tired of people speaking too fast when they parodied him.
o It was Yahtzee's haters that went mad over the quip, not his fans.
o Actually, both did. The comments on said vid were nothing but "LOL YAHTZEE WANTS TO BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN".
* The Borderlands review starts by mentioning that people keep pestering him to review games they like and then acting offended when he doesn't like them, apparently lacking any form of pattern recognition. "
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
ciortas1 said:
Sorry, if you didn't catch that, I meant that Fallout 3 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. have a reason to have weapon degradation included in them (granted, it's still annoying as shit), and that's because they are set in a post-apocalyptic wasteland where any piece of scrap is supposed to count, whereas MHT is an action 'RPG' set in the usual eastern fantasy setting, it has no place there.

And even while someone explained ITT that MHT uses the sharpness system as something that requires tactic (which is where I can somewhat agree about its purpose) I am still strongly against it. Why? Because in this case, it's necessary to sharpen your weapons to have an edge over some of the enemies for a short period of time. However, it's a boring, tedious and unnecessary core mechanic, where it should be something completely optional.

Which brings me to another action RPG called The Witcher. Alchemy, being a really fleshed out and deep profession (and it's a pretty big part of the game) is almost completely optional. Yes, you can use those potions to have an edge over enemies, but it is almost never required to beat missions and they never beat you over the head with it, and I admire that. It gives the players choice about how they want to play. Had this mechanic been used as Alchemy in the Witcher, my opinion about it would be different.
Oblivion had a 'sharpness' system, and an armour damage system (as like fo3). I quite like MH's sharpness sytem as it adds another level of complexity to your choice of weapon.

Your argument whether 'weapon condition' fits solely because of setting is idiotic. There's reasons why it's in MH... far better reasons than given in FO3, Oblivion, STALKER and the like. Especially when STALKER is only 'post-apocalyptic' in that people are stupid enough to enter 'The Zone' despite knowing how dangerous it is.

Albeit why is kinda explained in Shadows of Chernobyl.

But they certainly don't build their guns in 'The Zone' ... They smuggle them in. Sure they may mod it, but many military hardware can have barrels swapped out. Or modified to fire 'belt fed' or 'box' ammunition feed systems, or a million other modifications that change their use and abilities in the field.
 
Dec 14, 2009
15,526
0
0
Scrumpmonkey said:
So many new accounts (Probably from the likes of /V/ which WORSHIP this game) so little actual reasoning or knowledge. Monster Hunter Tri is a bad game by many peoples standards. BY my standards the camera is STILL atrocious (my main gripe with the other MH games) and every point Yhatzee brings up is Valid and to some extent gamebreaking.

There is hard and complex and then there is just bad game design. I'd say MH Tri is about 20% legitimate challenge, 80% controller snapping tedium. There is a good game buried somewhere beneth the loading screens, clusterfuck camera and general asshattery but there are lots of other games which don't make you wade through shit so you can tell yourself your being 'hardcore'.

You know those games which are hard but worth it? Something as complex as Sins of a Solar Empire or as refershing and challenging as STALKER; Shadow of Chernobyl? Monster hunter is not one of these games! I think you are mixing up 'Challenge' with 'Masochism induced by bad game'. I get that people might want the equivelant of playing an offline Korean MMO with their feet (fucking D-Pad camera!) but those people should be put in a room with soft walls and 24 hour guarding.
I've never really understood the camera gripe. It's 100% manual, i.e. if you're having problems with it then it's because your shit at controlling the camera. I never have the problem. I wouldn't consider myself a fanboy either. Tri is my first venture into the series and I haven't put the game down yet. I don't know, to me it's the good kind of grind (optional) I like collecting every piece necessary to complete armour and weapon sets. Monster Hunter is challenging, yes, are their some stupid aspects? Yes, but the game isn't hard because of bad game design. It is just a fun, hard game that I'm having a shit tonne of fun while playing it with friends.
 

Quiet Stranger

New member
Feb 4, 2006
4,409
0
0
Carnagath said:
Quiet Stranger said:
I gotta be honest, the Monster Hunter series is only for the most hard core of gamers, it's a long fucking game that never truly ends and to master it you must put in a LOT of hours....like me!
Length doesn't make a game "hardcore".
I never said anything about it being lengthy or you have to be hardcore.....actually I forgot what I was gonna say, but anyways, it's a long game and you gotta put in a lot of hours to get good, and I mean a lot, I started back on Monster Hunter Freedom 1 and kept transferring my characters over to the next one (also it's better if you start the first one (PSP not the other ones) and work your way through each game because of the character transfer)
 

chenry

New member
Oct 31, 2007
344
0
0
I didn't think the tutorial was 10 hours, but then again I didn't sit there with a stop watching timing the game. Look, if you like it, play it. If you don't, don't. And if you don't like someone's opinion of the game, who gives a toss.
 

Addendum_Forthcoming

Queen of the Edit
Feb 4, 2009
3,647
0
0
ciortas1 said:
PaulH said:
I did note that it's still annoying as shit. And yes, it does fit the setting, the only problem is execution. Stalker, and to a lesser extent Fallout 3 were shooting for realism, that's why I can easily see them there. The sharpness system in MHT looks like something just tacked on because the devs couldn't think of an actually exciting mechanic (it's Capcom, after all, so not surprised there).

The problem I stated about MHT, however, is the setting and the execution (also to a bigger extent, for making it such a core element). Perhaps you'd like to read that third paragraph of what you quoted there too.
Okay so if I take a sword and start hacking at a tank it won't dullen one iota? And it's not something they tacked on given it's been in every monster hunter (green was the maximum in MH1 if I remember correctly however).

Given some of the monsters have hides that are foot thick, or massive horns that you break off with continual strikes, I think having weapons slowly dullen over the ocurse of hitting said hides and horns makes sense.

And no I don't consider it annoying, because it balances out many weapon types from being too good.

I suggest using a brain before you talk.

Oh FYI, how exactly is weapons falling apart on your and jamming all the time 'realistic'. After 600 bullets, take it apart, clean the barrel, re-lubricate the moving parts, reassemble. How exactly is it realistic that you get one gun, strip it for parts, and add parts to other gun which uniformly boost all performances of the gun you wanted to repair in FO3?

That might work with the barrel, but it won't help remove dust or lubricate the weapon.
 

PayneTrayne

Filled with ReLRRgious fervor.
Dec 17, 2009
892
0
0
You've got to respect a man that can stick to his guns. His silly, fast firing guns.
 

theophanis

New member
May 29, 2010
9
0
0
@ciortas1: Hope you don't mind my lengthy input, but I'll reply to some of your points as someone who has played MH3.

TL;DR - The "tutorials" aren't tutorials as you probably think. They don't hand-hold and they introduce things at a steady pace over multiple missions as you said would be preferable. MH3 doesn't have a eastern fantasy setting, it has a primordial hunter-gatherer setting which explains the lack of magic, low-tech weapons and need for sharpening. The sharpness system isn't tedious: your weapons reset to max sharpness at the end of quests and sharpening involves a single button press. The alchemy system in The Witcher sounds great, and you may find the MH3 various weapon systems an interesting and also-almost-totally-optional equivalent. If you want more details, read below. :) If you just flame me for writing a lot, then I'm not interested. Obligatory essay warning:

WALL OF TEXT WARNING. No butthurt here, just explaining some of what ciortas1 was talking about.

The "Tutorial"

ciortas1 said:
Hell, it's an action RPG. Show us what each fucking button does and let us interact with NPCs that will teach us how and what to do ourselves if it IS that complicated for ya.
Hmm, maybe it's not been said yet, but that IS what the "tutorial" is. The hand-holding amounts to, "go on this quest, and here's a few lines of text to point you in the right direction. Now here's a couple more quests to introduce other aspects of the game you haven't seen yet." The tutorial section, as many have called it, isn't so much a tutorial as it is the early missions. No hand-holding, no frequent gameplay interruptions with PRESS A TO JUMP flashing on-screen, no long-winded explanations like the ones that plague Final Fantasy. They wrap up the "tutorials" in enough story trappings that it shouldn't really bother any first-time players either.

The "tutorials" consist of ~5 lines of text at the start of a few different quests which cover, in approximate order: basic game info (quest system, timer, equipment system and whatnot - these are around 5-10 lines of text each), combat, various in-game activities like gathering and sharpening, and underwater movement and combat. Later on you get sporadic info about more advanced stuff like how to capture large monsters, going online and so forth. This is all necessary knowledge for you to play. Any other information is gleaned from the manual, from NPCs in town or from the internet - all of which are totally optional of course.

A good game will throw down the basics for you in 5-20 minutes and then gradually introduce you to its features... A good game, if it doesn't introduce its features gradually, will be intuitive about them.
Agreed, and that's what MH does, for the most part. The basics are covered before and during the first mission, and then it arranges the early quest progression so that it tells you what you need to know when you first need to know it. It also arranges things so that you get to familiarise yourself with the game before you die fighting any major bosses. Why does it take an hour to get there? Because there are story scenes, travel time, combat time, gathering time, and lots of other things to do. You also have the option of doing your own thing (like free-roaming or repeating quests), which is why some people said the "tutorial" section can last 2 hours. Maybe that's what Yahtzee spent all his time doing.

I guess it's people's misconceptions about what actually happens in the tutorial, and the fact that MH players failed to properly explain what the "tutorial" really was.

Weapon Sharpness

I meant that Fallout 3 and S.T.A.L.K.E.R. have a reason to have weapon degradation included in them (granted, it's still annoying as shit), and that's because they are set in a post-apocalyptic wasteland where any piece of scrap is supposed to count, whereas MHT is an action 'RPG' set in the usual eastern fantasy setting, it has no place there.

And even while someone explained ITT that MHT uses the sharpness system as something that requires tactic (which is where I can somewhat agree about its purpose) I am still strongly against it. Why? Because in this case, it's necessary to sharpen your weapons to have an edge over some of the enemies for a short period of time. However, it's a boring, tedious and unnecessary core mechanic, where it should be something completely optional.
MH isn't set in the usual eastern fantasy setting however. The game follows a primordial theme throughout, from the user interface artwork to the environments to the NPC clothing. You live in a primitive hunter-gatherer-fishing village and there is no magic, little technology and very little in the way of spiky hair. I suppose in a similar way that a post-apocalyptic setting lends itself to scavenging, so does a primeval hunter-gatherer setting. Also consider your weapons are made of iron or other low-tech minerals so they will naturally wear out with use. They'd be even more likely to than mass-produced guns from the future, surely. ;)

So sharpening does have a place considering it's in a more realistic and more primitive setting than most Japanese games. Also the monsters obviously are heavily-armoured, and your weapons aren't high-tech, nor infused with magic. The sharpness mechanic is there to encourage players to be more accurate with their attacks - if you hit a monster's armoured back your weapon's sharpness will logically drop, while if you hit its soft underbelly then it won't dull as much, if at all.

The sharpness mechanic is not tedious and boring either. Your weapon's sharpness is automatically reset to maximum whenever you start/end a quest (by default it's at its maximum), and it takes about 2 seconds using one common item (a Whetstone) in the field to replenish your sharpness gauge a good amount. There's no need to stock up obscure items, no complex repair system, nor any stats to keep track of. It's a single item and a single button press. Sharpening time also happens to be 2 seconds you're totally vulnerable, so you'll need to find an opportune time and place to sharpen it, or you'll get trampled by nearby monsters. The whole system is there to encourage players to be more skillful. It also balances out the damage output of melee weapons with the bowgun which has limited ammunition and often needs to be reloaded.

Furthermore if you really insist that sharpening be optional - well, it is. You could defeat monsters with your blade totally dull, but it would take a hell of a lot longer thanks to lowered damage, accuracy and more deflections. But it's introduced early and its so simple to make use of that you'd have to be totally dim not to use it.

Cool Optional RPG Systems

Which brings me to another action RPG called The Witcher. Alchemy, being a really fleshed out and deep profession (and it's a pretty big part of the game) is almost completely optional. Yes, you can use those potions to have an edge over enemies, but it is almost never required to beat missions and they never beat you over the head with it, and I admire that. It gives the players choice about how they want to play. Had this mechanic been used as Alchemy in the Witcher, my opinion about it would be different.
Though I haven't played The Witcher (hear it's very good though), I imagine an equivalent to that is the 7 weapon types in Monster Hunter Tri, which all control in a totally different fashion. I've read some people say that the game has 7 combat systems because the weapons are all so different. You can choose one that you like over the others, or you can spread your expertise across multiple types. The button presses for each of them even have different moves - a particular button may do an overhead strike with the sword and shield, but will do a piercing attack with the lance.

The weapons also handle differently - some people like slow but heavy-hitting weapons (greatswords), others prefer to have a reliable shield behind which they can poke at enemies (lances), others like to nip in and out using lots of small hits (sword and shield), and others still like to attack from afar (bowguns). Bowguns in and of themselves are composed of three parts (frame, barrel and stock) for customising the sorts of ammo you can use, its weight class, whether it can rapidfire certain ammo types and whether it has a shield you can use to defend yourself.

These multiple weapon systems are optional (past the one you choose to use from the beginning) but have so much variety, depth and strategy that they perhaps are the equivalent of The Witcher's fabled alchemy system. :) Nor are you beat over the head with it - the weapon shop girl pretty much just muses, "I wonder whether there is a best weapon out there? I guess we'll never know". Sometimes she'll tell you about the specialties a particular weapon type has, and that's it.

Oh, and all non-main story dialogue is skippable with a single button press.

Wow, that got far longer than I expected. Guess I just like writing about the game, and there's a lot of interesting details that you can cover. Anyway... Congratulations if you read all that!
 

Arkeetk

New member
Feb 21, 2010
6
0
0
Am i the only one who thought the game was simply okay? nothing special but not terrible. And why have people taken this so to heart? You're not THE GAME. If you like it you shouldn't be so bothered. I bet a lot of you have laughed at other game reviews hes done that haven't been fair but only got all up in arms over this one. Yahtzee even makes fun of games he likes and i bet that he wont read or care about anything some of you have addressed directly at him so save your fingers.
 

GrimHeaper

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,012
0
0
PaulH said:
Manji187 said:
The game's a total grindfest...and that's one of the reasons fans love it.
The game's controls and camera take some getting used to (in comparison to other contemporary games)...and the fans call it challenging and love the game for it.
The game has the flimsiest story ever...and the fans say it's not about the story.

I'm seeing a pattern...fans will be fans.

In the end it comes down to: the game's for you or it's not...like with any game really.
And you (and other idiots) are the reasons why modern games suck.

Why the fuck do we need a 'story' in a game? Seriously. Most game voice actors sound as appealing as a circular saw on sheet metal. Most 'writers' in games feel like the idiot students that flunked literature in a BA at University.

Seriously, video games would be doing themselves a big plus if they just threw out story, because no gamer plays a game for the story.
If there is no story I feel like a person killing things for no reason, a murderer if you will. Even if it is pixels it will effect your mind.
 

GrimHeaper

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,012
0
0
joshuaayt said:
Twinmill5000 said:
joshuaayt said:
Well, at least this'll be the end of it- Tomorrow he'll have a new video, and it will be excellent and everyone will remember how damn awesome Yahtzee videos are.
Else they'll join the hate groups over on tvtropes. I've never seen that many feminists in one thread before...
And yes, I AM amused at the fact that there exists hate groups.
Link pls. I gotta see this lol.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/DethroningMoment/ZeroPunctuation
Ok, now I KNOW there used to be more stuff there. The note at the top does say something about removing stuff if it's untrue, so maybe that's what happened to all of it. It's less of a hate group and more a critique spot now...
Loonerinoes said:
DINGDINGDINGDING It's over 500 comments ladies and gentlemen! The most commented Extra Punctuation article of all tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiimmmmeeees!

Will the mayhem continue throughout the week? Stay tuned...to this thread of irrelevance.
Cracked me up for being so true.
 

GrimHeaper

New member
Jun 1, 2010
1,012
0
0
ciortas1 said:
theophanis said:
Wow, someone who played the game actually explaining us something! Cheers, and I stand corrected for most points. The reason I posted here in the first place is because the vast majority of eastern games are given a free pass with their fans yelling 'fuck off' the moment you try to criticise it, so with it happening through most of this thread, yeah..

Still, if you're gimped when your weapon isn't sharpened and the game is balanced around the weapons being sharpened, it's hard to call that optional :)
Indeed it would make sense if it lost sharpness around 150 blows or 500, but like 10? Crappy weapons if you ask me.
 

Mindmaker

New member
May 29, 2010
74
0
0
ciortas1 said:
Also, calling bullshit on everyone defending the sharpness system. It's almost as bad a design choice as the stupid tutorial. Why? Because it's repetetive, completely unnecessary in a fantasy game or almost any game that isn't shooting to be S.T.A.L.K.E.R. or Fallout 3 and just plain dumb from what I've read here.
So how is sharpening worse than for instance reloading your weapon in fps games?
I've yet to see someone complain about that, even though its happens much more frequently and takes about the same time.


What the hell are you talking about?
Why is the tutorial a bad design choice?
How can you tell that is it stupid and not being a part of the experience, which is actually quite fun?
Have you played the game or are your assumptions based on this so called "game critic"?