Monster Hunter Tri

[shadowmarth]

This, and Yahtzee's initial review, is a testament to Japanese game design, and how much it blows.

I agree on every single point of his rant, and it's not because I'm some ZP-fan-tard. I've only played the demo, and I did not find any enjoyment out of it. I even went as far as to try out every character available and different control schemes for each one, hoping to find some redeeming factor. By the end of this endeavor, there was nothing worth the effort. It's just a terribly designed game on the wrong console.

The wiimote controls are terrible (but the CCpro is great), and the demo is boring because they give you overpowered weapons and you don't have any clue what you're doing with them. The actual game takes great timing, skill, and knowledge of your weapon. Doesn't hurt to know the boss's moves too.

 

[hansari]

LMAO

If only people played some of the same games Yahtzee has criticized as of recent and compared their expereince to his reviews.

Fact of the matter is guys, Yahtzee's reviews aren't quality like they first started out (Fable: Lost chapters anyone?) and thats because he has a million things he's doing that he wasn't doing before.

And now the quality of the vids suffer for it.

 

[Quorothorn]

I do love how all the MHT defenders are focusing exclusively on the "tutorial = 10 hours" thing. Because when your argument rests entirely on a literal approach to one particular bit of exaggeration in someone's article, you know you have righteousness on your side, for certain sure.

 

[Anaklusmos]

Why won't people just let this drop? First things first, anyone who wanted this game has already bought/played it. So their opinion will be unchanged by anything Yahtzee says. People who don't want this game are not going to get it, so they don't care about the context of his reviews, just the comedy within them. People who are undecided about this game, are not going to use Yahtzee's reviews as to wether or not they should get it.

So stop complaining, I'm sure Yahtzee has moved on and is now applying to finishing touches to tomorrows video, so you won't get another responce out of him, all your doing now is argueing with other people on the forums, which is currently split two ways, people who have played the game and are defending it, and people who haven't played the game and are just laughing at the people defending.

 

[Krantos]

Really I do not understand why some people insist on sending you angry emails when you review a game badly.

Poor self-confidence? As in, it makes them feel inadequate when someone disagrees with them.

Or, conversely, Messiah Complex? They assume that their opinion is fact and get frustrated because "all the stupid people can't face the facts." Or my personal favorite, "This game is [Good/Bad] you're all just too stupid to realize it." (I've actually seen that last one. LMAO!)

I'm with you, though. I love Splinter Cell and Oblivion, both games that Yahtzee ripped apart, and I don't care. It doesn't stop me from enjoying them. In fact, the only issue I had with the Oblivion review is that he didn't talk about any of the things that bugged me like the horses or the arena combatants being on speed.

 

[mightybozz]

The main problem with waiting for a game to improve later is how bad the first bits are. If the first bits are at least competent or even brilliant, then getting better later is great (see Ocarina of Time and becoming an adult). But if the early bits are so unengaging and tedious that you spend longer pouring hatred onto it by putting together a video review than it took for the game to annoy you, then I think it's reasonable not to bother. Why wouldn't a developer pick up in testing that the first hours are simply not working?

 

[Kavachi]

I was disappointed by the bad review (not that he said the game was bad, but that he reviewed it poorly). I have a little more respect that he actually took the time to progress through to the Great Jaggi battle and get more feel for the game. I don't care if someone doesn't like Monster Hunter, as long as it is judged by more than the tutorial.

However, how the hell did you spend 10 hours on the tutorial? It's five quick gathering missions. It should take a new player 2 hours max, as in they took so long to figure out how to even draw their weapon that it would take two hours max. You can't even spend 10 hours doing them without failing due to the 50 minute time limit on missions!

A review isn't made it bad because you don't agree, and if you don't agree and you think it's just a fine game he shouldn't really get to you. So you can either just play that shitty game and enjoy yourself instead of wasting time whining about things "mean old Yahtzee" said. Why do you even bother, attention problems?

And about the tutorial. It is Yahtzee, he is known for over-exagguration. 10 hours is indeed ridiculous, however 50X5=250mins= more than 4 hours, so you're 2 hour max is pretty idiotic. However a real tutorial I think should be like the one from Brütal Legend. A 5 minute mission to roll you in, not 4 bloody hours of gathering horse shit, which probably will feel like 10 hours. So next time think before you actually post your bullshit.

 

[Krimson Kun]

Personally, I thought it worked well in the Elder Scrolls games. But there it was a very gradual thing, in which it would generally take 2-3 quests before your weapon showed any signs of deteriorating.

And unlike games like Far Cry, there was no chance that the weapons would spontaneously not work; they just did reduced damage.

AND, unlike Fallout, they were easy to repair. What I hated about Fallout's mechanic is that it meant you had to lug around 4-5 copies of whatever gun you were using just so you'd be able to use it until you got to the next area. Whereas 1 or 2 1lb hammers could see you stay at 100% weapon damage for hours on end.

I think the person meant it's just a bad, and annoying idea. Whether the mechanics of it are presented well or not.

Also, can we please shut up about the whole "IT'S NOT REALLY TEN HOURS OMG HE LIED AND IS A LIAR AND EVERY OPINION HE HAS SHOULD BE SUBSEQUENTLY DISCARDED BECAUSE OF THIS AND OTHER THINGS ON THIS CHART I'VE MADE." shtick? I'm sure people have gathered by now that it's not actually that length of time and he's either horrendous at playing games, or he was simply exaggerating to prove a point. This, on no level, invalidates his opinion of the game.

It does however put his credibility on the line. He made the game sound like it was nothing but boring thing without any fucking thing to do(not even giant boss monsters existed in his review), and that is why people got angry in the first place, because he was incorrect about the game. He is entitled to his opinion as you are to yours and me to mine, but it is a whole other thing to just rant and rant and rant about the tutorial(all the things that he rants about? Goes away on the NEXT QUEST).

 

[shadowmarth]

I do love how all the MHT defenders are focusing exclusively on the "tutorial = 10 hours" thing. Because when your argument rests entirely on a literal approach to one particular bit of exaggeration in someone's article, you know you have righteousness on your side, for certain sure.

It's an extreme exaggeration and extremely telling. The tutorial isn't even remotely that long, Yahtzee's just trying to bullshit his way out of the fact that he barely played the game before making the review. We can't really argue much else because nothing else Yahtzee said is really based on any fact in the game. The gathering is rather minor, especially since you have a number of faculties to AUTOMATICALLY do most gathering for you (but somehow Yahtzee still bitches about the farm, that exact aparatus). The weapons are fairly slow compared to say, God of War, but that's because the boss fights are focused on carefully timing your attacks and dodges, instead of just wailing on the meelee button for eternity like most action games.

Please play the game before you shit on it.

 

[golbleen]

The tutorial isn't ten hours

Anyone saying it's more than an hour is full of it

Yahtzee is full of crap and projecting

 

[Rect Pola]

Yeah, weapon degradation and the item system in general is inexcusable on many fronts.

One thing I always thought would make a good solution to way overlong tutorials is make it an option at the start screen. You know, you could select the "prologue story" or dive right into the main quest. A game like Monster Hunter suits my theory it well, because there are no personal stats or levels to build, just better equipment and your own proficiency at making the Wii controls respond how you instructed them. Since you created a character at the start, you'd have the choice of building one at the start of real game, or if you bothered, continuing with the one you designed for the training. This also could have done wonders for GTA with a little retooling to cut you loose without 47 small tutorials.

 

[Quorothorn]

Personally, I thought it worked well in the Elder Scrolls games. But there it was a very gradual thing, in which it would generally take 2-3 quests before your weapon showed any signs of deteriorating.

And unlike games like Far Cry, there was no chance that the weapons would spontaneously not work; they just did reduced damage.

AND, unlike Fallout, they were easy to repair. What I hated about Fallout's mechanic is that it meant you had to lug around 4-5 copies of whatever gun you were using just so you'd be able to use it until you got to the next area. Whereas 1 or 2 1lb hammers could see you stay at 100% weapon damage for hours on end.

I think the person meant it's just a bad, and annoying idea. Whether the mechanics of it are presented well or not.

Also, can we please shut up about the whole "IT'S NOT REALLY TEN HOURS OMG HE LIED AND IS A LIAR AND EVERY OPINION HE HAS SHOULD BE SUBSEQUENTLY DISCARDED BECAUSE OF THIS AND OTHER THINGS ON THIS CHART I'VE MADE." shtick? I'm sure people have gathered by now that it's not actually that length of time and he's either horrendous at playing games, or he was simply exaggerating to prove a point. This, on no level, invalidates his opinion of the game.

It does however put his credibility on the line. He made the game sound like it was nothing but boring thing without any fucking thing to do(not even giant boss monsters existed in his review), and that is why people got angry in the first place, because he was incorrect about the game. He is entitled to his opinion as you are to yours and me to mine, but it is a whole other thing to just rant and rant and rant about the tutorial(all the things that he rants about? Goes away on the NEXT QUEST).

And does that magically remove their presence from the beginning, then? You have to remember that first impressions are important. Very important.

 

[Krimson Kun]

I was disappointed by the bad review (not that he said the game was bad, but that he reviewed it poorly). I have a little more respect that he actually took the time to progress through to the Great Jaggi battle and get more feel for the game. I don't care if someone doesn't like Monster Hunter, as long as it is judged by more than the tutorial.

However, how the hell did you spend 10 hours on the tutorial? It's five quick gathering missions. It should take a new player 2 hours max, as in they took so long to figure out how to even draw their weapon that it would take two hours max. You can't even spend 10 hours doing them without failing due to the 50 minute time limit on missions!

A review isn't made it bad because you don't agree, and if you don't agree and you think it's just a fine game he shouldn't really get to you. So you can either just play that shitty game and enjoy yourself instead of wasting time whining about things "mean old Yahtzee" said. Why do you even bother, attention problems?

And about the tutorial. It is Yahtzee, he is known for over-exagguration. 10 hours is indeed ridiculous, however 50X5=250mins= more than 4 hours, so you're 2 hour max is pretty idiotic. However a real tutorial I think should be like the one from Brütal Legend. A 5 minute mission to roll you in, not 4 bloody hours of gathering horse shit, which probably will feel like 10 hours. So next time think before you actually post your bullshit.

so you take the maximum time to finish all the quests? it is 50 min limit, not you have to sit there for 50 min even after you finish the objective. So 2 hour max is not idiotic.

You're right, review isn't made bade because one doesn't agree, but this is really a bad one. He has played the tutorial and judged the whole game just on that little part. It took me about an hour to get there, seeing as he's a critic he was probably exploring and such so maybe that's why it took him so long, but took me an hour, shouldn't take him more than 3 even if he was fooling around a lot. But that is not the point, the point is that he is wrong on certain things that he points out in the review, and that is why the review is bad, because it gives false impressions and wrong information

 

[Quorothorn]

Yeah, weapon degradation and the item system in general is inexcusable on many fronts.

One thing I always thought would make a good solution to way overlong tutorials is make it an option at the start screen. You know, you could select the "prologue story" or dive right into the main quest. A game like Monster Hunter suits my theory it well, because there are no personal stats or levels to build, just better equipment and your own proficiency at making the Wii controls respond how you instructed them. Since you created a character at the start, you'd have the choice of building one at the start of real game, or if you bothered, continuing with the one you designed for the training. This also could have done wonders for GTA with a little retooling to cut you loose without 47 small tutorials.

Saint's Row 2 has a skippable beginning tutorial IIRC. Of course, the tutorial is like 1 minute, so it doesn't matter a whole lot either way.

 

[Jaebird]

This, and Yahtzee's initial review, is a testament to Japanese game design, and how much it blows.

I agree on every single point of his rant, and it's not because I'm some ZP-fan-tard. I've only played the demo, and I did not find any enjoyment out of it. I even went as far as to try out every character available and different control schemes for each one, hoping to find some redeeming factor. By the end of this endeavor, there was nothing worth the effort. It's just a terribly designed game on the wrong console.

The wiimote controls are terrible (but the CCpro is great), and the demo is boring because they give you overpowered weapons and you don't have any clue what you're doing with them. The actual game takes great timing, skill, and knowledge of your weapon. Doesn't hurt to know the boss's moves too.

It also doesn't hurt to make a good game that's, you know, fun.

 

[Mindmaker]

I do love how all the MHT defenders are focusing exclusively on the "tutorial = 10 hours" thing. Because when your argument rests entirely on a literal approach to one particular bit of exaggeration in someone's article, you know you have righteousness on your side, for certain sure.

And I do love how the sheeple here ignore posts, which calmly and reasonably point out misconceptions about this game.

 

[The Brewin]

Blah blah blah, MH3 does not have a 10 hour tutorial. It has a 90 minute tutorial, unless you linger on, doing things that are unnecessary forever. Do them for a bit, explore a bit, then move on. Do you need a manual to play this game, someone to hold your hand? You don't like some elements of it, sure, I accept that, but saying it has a 10 hour tutorial is like reviewing WoW and spending your first 10 hours picking herbs and then saying "In this game you do nothing but pick herbs for the first 10 hours". That's pretty silly.

Also, WELL UP YOURS TOO, PRICK!

Well Yahtzee did do fighting aswell as the herb picking and management tasks...how much more to the game is actually left to do after the time he spent...the combat doesn't magically get better, and if he doesnt like this part of the game now, he wont like it after the tutorial whether its 5 minutes or 10 hours after.
As for exploring, well I agree with Yahtzee, the loading times completely take me out of any immersion in the game. Its not bad...but not great. The tedious sections Yahtzee have done and mentioned are actually a rare moment of him going out of his way to play longer in a game.

 

[Krimson Kun]

Personally, I thought it worked well in the Elder Scrolls games. But there it was a very gradual thing, in which it would generally take 2-3 quests before your weapon showed any signs of deteriorating.

And unlike games like Far Cry, there was no chance that the weapons would spontaneously not work; they just did reduced damage.

AND, unlike Fallout, they were easy to repair. What I hated about Fallout's mechanic is that it meant you had to lug around 4-5 copies of whatever gun you were using just so you'd be able to use it until you got to the next area. Whereas 1 or 2 1lb hammers could see you stay at 100% weapon damage for hours on end.

I think the person meant it's just a bad, and annoying idea. Whether the mechanics of it are presented well or not.

Also, can we please shut up about the whole "IT'S NOT REALLY TEN HOURS OMG HE LIED AND IS A LIAR AND EVERY OPINION HE HAS SHOULD BE SUBSEQUENTLY DISCARDED BECAUSE OF THIS AND OTHER THINGS ON THIS CHART I'VE MADE." shtick? I'm sure people have gathered by now that it's not actually that length of time and he's either horrendous at playing games, or he was simply exaggerating to prove a point. This, on no level, invalidates his opinion of the game.

It does however put his credibility on the line. He made the game sound like it was nothing but boring thing without any fucking thing to do(not even giant boss monsters existed in his review), and that is why people got angry in the first place, because he was incorrect about the game. He is entitled to his opinion as you are to yours and me to mine, but it is a whole other thing to just rant and rant and rant about the tutorial(all the things that he rants about? Goes away on the NEXT QUEST).

And does that magically remove their presence from the beginning, then? You have to remember that first impressions are important. Very important.

Well, it actually does. The first real combat that you get into is really really really good. Somethings that Yahtzee mentioned in the review and the EP, goes away later on in the game(AT this point they go away). So what if the game starts on a bumpy road? Tell me one game that is just an amazing ride of awesomeness that makes you shit bricks from the beginning

 

[troqu]

Personally, I thought it worked well in the Elder Scrolls games. But there it was a very gradual thing, in which it would generally take 2-3 quests before your weapon showed any signs of deteriorating.

And unlike games like Far Cry, there was no chance that the weapons would spontaneously not work; they just did reduced damage.

AND, unlike Fallout, they were easy to repair. What I hated about Fallout's mechanic is that it meant you had to lug around 4-5 copies of whatever gun you were using just so you'd be able to use it until you got to the next area. Whereas 1 or 2 1lb hammers could see you stay at 100% weapon damage for hours on end.

I think the person meant it's just a bad, and annoying idea. Whether the mechanics of it are presented well or not.

Also, can we please shut up about the whole "IT'S NOT REALLY TEN HOURS OMG HE LIED AND IS A LIAR AND EVERY OPINION HE HAS SHOULD BE SUBSEQUENTLY DISCARDED BECAUSE OF THIS AND OTHER THINGS ON THIS CHART I'VE MADE." shtick? I'm sure people have gathered by now that it's not actually that length of time and he's either horrendous at playing games, or he was simply exaggerating to prove a point. This, on no level, invalidates his opinion of the game.

The problem is that people take his word for the words of god when it comes to video games, and to be honest I don't know why. I love his reviews, they're hilarious and often point out major flaws in the games that are interesting, but they're almost always exaggerated. All of the people here who watch ZP and decide not to buy a game must have a very sad library of games because Yahtzee almost never reviews things nicely and it's hilarious that he doesn't. I love video games in general, and want as many people as possible to play as many games as possible so people who take ZP seriously make me sad.

 

[Quorothorn]

I do love how all the MHT defenders are focusing exclusively on the "tutorial = 10 hours" thing. Because when your argument rests entirely on a literal approach to one particular bit of exaggeration in someone's article, you know you have righteousness on your side, for certain sure.

It's an extreme exaggeration and extremely telling. The tutorial isn't even remotely that long, Yahtzee's just trying to bullshit his way out of the fact that he barely played the game before making the review. We can't really argue much else because nothing else Yahtzee said is really based on any fact in the game. The gathering is rather minor, especially since you have a number of faculties to AUTOMATICALLY do most gathering for you (but somehow Yahtzee still bitches about the farm, that exact aparatus). The weapons are fairly slow compared to say, God of War, but that's because the boss fights are focused on carefully timing your attacks and dodges, instead of just wailing on the meelee button for eternity like most action games.

Please play the game before you shit on it.

If Yahtzee's only point was the length of the tutorial, maybe you'd have a point.

And since I'm not "shitting" on the game, no, I don't need to play it. I'm merely pointing out that the defenders of this game are as a group focusing on precisely one point of exaggeration by Yahtzee. Whilst it is a lovely glimpse into the Internet hive-mind at work, it doesn't make for a very compelling argument to an outside observer.