Monster Hunter Tri

[Reverend Del]

A good tutorial is a part of the game and fun. GTA had a good habit of doing this up until IV, but even then some of the tut missions are integral to the story even though they are teaching you how to do things. A 90 minute collection of fetch quests sounds like a root canal in terms of possible enjoyment. I don't play WoW because I am not spending FFX like amounts of time running backward and forward collecting gizzards just so I can get to the levels required to actually destroy things properly.

MH Tri sounds like it's really not my cup of tea, or jaffa cake, or any other tea time treat, the days of games grabbing you from the get go seems to be long gone. FFXIII with it's interminably bad pacing, and no after 25+ hours it's still not good enough to forgive it's many many flaws. GTAIV with it's flaccid plot. Best game I've played recently is Arkham Asylum where I didn't even notice I was playing the tutorial, the game had hooked me enough not to notice by that point. More good games like that would be nice. Hook then teach, don't teach then hook.

 

[mike1921]

Sure is agree with yAHtzhee in here.

It's a good game, get over yourselves

Yes, how dare we agree with yahtzee that a game you like sucks. Obviously if you say it's a good game it must be, all mighty person with 10 posts.

 

[BrilliantCircle]

You won't like the game if you have never played Monster Hunter before and they just thrust you into the meat of the game, and you won't like the game if you think the tutorial is too long. Basically there are two kinds (maybe three?) people who do not like this game.

Group A) The people who made is past the 1* quests, fought some big monsters, do not like how tedious the game can be
Group B) The people who played only 1* quests and hated the game

and then...

Group C) The people who use either group A or Bs opinion to hate the game

Most people who have played Monster Hunter and didn't like it are group B, you can see this in a lot of reviews (worst being Gametrailers review of Monster Hunter Freedom, where they had to out right lie to try to prove their point). This includes Yahtzee. People like to point out flaws in people's opinions, that's why there are a lot of people pointing out this review.

It can be summed up that Yahtzee did not review the game, he reviewed the tutorial, which he doesn't like. The thing is, his review says this is what the whole game is like, which it is not.

 

[Mindmaker]

Is the fifth mission forcing you to do shit that you will never be forced to do again so you learn how to do it? Because that's how it was explained to me, if it does, I don't care if I have to read the quickinfo, the mission is still part of a tutorial.

Even though I have read all your post that far and slowly startig to think you're just out here to troll some "fanboys" im going to try to explain it anyway.

My source: http://monsterhunter.wikia.com/wiki/MH3:_Offline_Quests

As you can see only 3 out of the 7 one star quests, which many refer to as "tutorial", are marked as "Key Quests" which means that you have to complete at least these 3 to advance to the next rank.

The first one shows you how to gather stuff, and teaches you the basics of combining and crafting.
The next two give you the combat basics and let you fight minor monsters.
During these two quests you probably visit 11 out of 12 areas from the first zone.

The other 3 show you a rare resource, which wont be useful until much later in the game, how to catch fish, which wont be that important as you will get fishing boats fairly soon and the last one gives you some opportunity to train underwater movement.

After that you get a "Urgent Quest", which after completion will unlock the two star quests.

You can pick the first big monster fight right afterwards.

If you look further down the list, you will see only few missions marked as key quests and only very few include NOT fighting giant monsters and are only being there so you can make yourself familiar with the new area.

 

[camazotz]

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!

90 minutes for a tutorial is way too long (IMO).

 

[Zeruun22]

Also, when people say "tutorial", they mean the 1 star quests. None of which has the "Press the A button to swing your sword!" crap.

Quest 1: Gather mushrooms. Learn to gather.
Quest 2: Kill raptors. Learn to hit stuff that hits back.
Quest 3: Kill water herbivores. Learn to swim.
Quest 4: Kill water lizards. Learn to kill stuff in water. Also plot related.

That's all 1 star stuff. The other 3 quests in there are optional.

Quest 5: Kill a Great Jaggi. Fight and kill a boss monster.
Quest 6: Capture a Great Jaggi. Learn how to beat down and capture a monster before you kill it.

That's 2 stars. By 3 stars you'll have met at least 4 boss monsters and they just keep getting bigger and scarier. Yeah, if you can't handle trying the same monster a few times to learn how he moves or where to hit him, then maybe this game isn't for you.

Do all modern RPGs need a ten hour intro section before the game gets "good"? First FFXIII now this. Remember Kingdom Hearts II? Remember that absolutely annoying three-hour nonsense fest as Roxas at the beginning? Do you like that? Well, imagine playing a game, but with an intro THREE TIMES that length. Amazing.

Guys get this in your heads, handcuff it, gag it, and store it in a closet, the tutorial is just a series of little boxes with text from the chiefs son that explains what youre going to do for the first few quests. These quests are called key quests that let you advance to the harder ones. Theyre extremely easy and doable in maybe a half hour if you just accomplish the task and dont explore. Mushrooms you need 4 and the first area you step out in has 2 nodes for them geez so long I know right? And on the weapon sharpness you guys seem so hung up on, if you did in fact read about this aspect of the game youd know that higher sharpness actually increases your weapons damage apart from the set dmg thats on it.

I'm not making this post to get any of you who've already decided not to play to play. I simply dont want anyone directed to this guys review to see his half-truths and decide this game is bad because of his review. So to recap 30 minutes to skip text in a little box and do 4 key quests you need to advance to harder quests with bigger bosses, good sharpness increases damage apart from the set damage.

 

[t_rexaur]

Is the fifth mission forcing you to do shit that you will never be forced to do again so you learn how to do it? Because that's how it was explained to me, if it does, I don't care if I have to read the quickinfo, the mission is still part of a tutorial.

Not really, all the missions are pretty much what you do in the game proper. They start off slow, like go and harvest x amount of mushrooms, or kill y bad guy and it's easy to see why it seems like an MMO, but they are all different. And once you get though them you get to fight bigger and bigger monsters and try out new weapons and armour. It is slow, but no where near the 10 hour mark. As people have pointed out you can do it in a little over an hour if you mash A since the quests are so easy that... well, you'd have to be a brain dead retard to somehow take 10 hours doing them, no offence to anyone.

There also seems to be some confusion about the weapon degradation system. Weapons only degrade while in a mission and only from hitting monsters. Every time you start a mission you start at maximum sharpness and once you upgrade your weapons you don't need to sharpen that often. It should also be noted that most large monsters tend to either move area so often, or flee when they get low on health. Both of these occasions are ample times to sharpen weapons and do anything else you need to do. If you're playing online and feeling daring, you can sharpen your weapon while the monster is attacking someone else if you really have to.

That's not to say Yahtzee is completely wrong on everything. Only being able to take one weapon with you can get a bit boring, and you do collect a lot of stuff over the course of the game. I don't have any problems with the things he called out right, but having played the game, it's a bit annoying to see him call out problems which just don't exist. I can understand his constraints but he seems to have picked this game then decided not to play it, which isn't exactly the kind of thing you do when you're a critic.

Just 2 more things before my rant ends First of all, yes, quests charge a fee to take, you get that back if you win, and if you are good with your money you get so much that losing one or 2 quest fees because you want to abandon it for whatever reason won't dent your wallet in the slightest.

Finally, I take affront to the argument of "if a game takes x long to get good then it's doing it wrong". I say X, because it is an arbitrary number which is different for most people. Most games start slow and pick up the pace and only the truly exceptional games can start great and stay great. I don't think there's many games that start with explosive set pieces and amazing action and somehow keep that pace up for the entire game, and if they can, they tend to be realllly short (looking at you Modern Warfare and MW2). Having played Monster Hunter, I think I'm more entitled than the people who haven't played it to say that it's one of those games where you only get out what you're willing to put in. Persevere and you are treated to some spectacular boss fights and locations. Give up at the start because of the slow tutorial and you miss the other 90% of the game.

 

[Z(ombie)fan]

Here are two lines that just reminded me of why Yahtzee continues to piss me off:

Do you people listen to yourselves? Maybe if I had your kind of wealthy, privileged lifestyle and could spend most of my days idly playing Wii by the pool as a team of oiled bodybuilders fanned me with palm fronds, but some of us have jobs to do. Articles to write. Other, better games to review. Fun Space Games to avoid working on.

There you go. That was your bonus review expansion pack. Up yours, Monster Hunter Tri fans. Up yours with blobs of Icy Hot on the end.

Wow. What an arrogant son of a ***** you've become Yahtzee. Do you honestly think all of us live that kind of lifestyle? I work just as long a job as you and I still find time to play through games that suffer the same problem you're giving a pissy fit about. And your little rant on why you hate Tri doesn't justify the need to insult the console it's on yet a-fucking-gain. I said it before, and I'll say it again: there are some genres or at least games that Yahtzee should just fucking ignore and shut his mouth on. Call me when he pulls the Wii's sensor bar out of his ass because it's clear that's the only stick up there that makes him say this shit.

past this, I am going to stop reading yahtzee's comments.

because people who watch/read him are clearly not listening to the whole or just plain retarded.

oh I have to go somewhere? well screw you, Im reading and I dont want to misinterpret the message.

and do you think he meant all of the people who like it? no just the stupid whiny bastards.

and he wasnt bashing the wii, his arguments are mainly along the lines of "THIS game doesnt use the motion controls right, ruining the game".

so there: yahtzee is smarter than you give him credit because you seem to skip a ton of shit he says.

 

[camazotz]

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!

Hearing "It has a 90 minute tutorial, not a 10 hour one" is like hearing "You aren't raped by several hairy men, there's only one". It's not really making the situation sound particularly more appealing

That...was one of the most frighteningly awesome analogies I have ever seen. You get a star! And I'll be staying waaaaaay away from you and your hairy men now, thank you!

 

[mastiffchild]

MH3 isn't for everyone, I can dig that as I NEVER enjoyed any of the previous games and what I've played of this one(which was well past any early tutorial bits and bobbins as I have an eager fanmate of the series on hand at all times)just made me think it was more of the same with a little more pretty and a little more impressive scale-though even that seemed balanced by the Wii not really being up to the task at hand and needing a breather every few feet.

Whatever, I'm clearly not shocked AT ALL that Yahtzee wasn't impressed. No, what's more interesting here is his assertion that he doesn't feel the need to play an entire game to review it should he get totally bored by the whole thing at an earlier point. Y'see I do exactly the same(and not always just with games i'm talking about-films and books also fall into the same trap with me)and have often been told what a fool I am and that you shouldn't write or talk about a game without seeing everything it has to offer.

Now, I think this is spurious on two differing levels: Firstly, I agree with our venerable comma dissenter that any game boring me so badly that I CANNOT bear finishing the story is deserving of whatever I say about it AS LONG AS I say this is what happened in the body of the review. That way people who tend to find they agree with my tastes need not look into things further but those still interested can seek out other reviewers who may have a higher boredom threshold or totally different ideas about what makes an entertaining game. Everybody happy and everything tickety-effin-boo, no? It surely isn't a good point for a game if it bores you to tears well before any "good stuff" to be had anyway, is it? No.

Secondly, reviews for games that already have a fanbase are subject to a couple of things that necessitate a reviewer hammer a game for boring them to a near death vegetative state. These games already have devotees, in the media and gaming community, ready to testify to their greatness at great length which could give those who, possibly for good reason, haven't yet gotten into said series the wrong idea about the newest entry so if we find a game like this dull beyond belief why on Earth should we play through to see if it picks up? Most of us have pretty hefty demands on our time and free time is precious which makes, imho, a dull opening multi houred slog a massive thing needing pointing out as a possible deal breaker.

I could go on justifying the action of reviewing games only to the point they make you question your will to live but, really, it's starting to make me think anyone arguing otherwise is missing the whole point of reviews and the basic nature of most of our modern day gaming (or otherwise) lives. Basically, we don't have time for things that actually bore us as entertainment-not pointing out when a game(or film, or book)does this to us is a dereliction of duty to ourselves and anyone reading what we might say in the hope of getting an actual opinion.

So what if you love the game? There are plenty of reviews backing your opinion but, rest assured, it's not the only one that's valid. Another thing; unlike one of my schoolmates I didn't feel the need to pursue using Heroin to the point I lost my home, family and my life to know it wasn't for me-even if it might get better in any subsequent afterlife so would I be unfair in advising someone to avoid it? Point is you don't always need to know every last thing to form your view on something anyway-and when a game's main purpose must be to entertain us carrying on way beyond a point where it's done totally the opposite for many hours seems like making excuses for the developer and not looking out for your readership or even being honest with them. Surely that's the main thing.

BTW-I find it very strange that people, even today, often miss what I find obvious about reviews and reviewers. There's a handful of reviewers whose opinions I take notice of. I don't doubt other reviewers are equally honest or think that their opinions are worth, somehow, less than those I use. No, I just use those whose opinion I tend to agree with on past games/books/cars/dolls houses/lubricants and so on. If they get bored with a game(and we ALL get bored with a game and fail to finish it sometimes I'm positive)then I think it likely I too may find the game dull so I seek a second opinion from another reviewer I tend to concur with to confirm the diagnosis. Isn't that how everyone uses reviews? I sometimes wonder if a lot of gamers have been so engrossed in their hobby that they'd be flummoxed by, say, a train timetable and people complaining about this kind of thing just because they disagree with a review backs this worry up no end.

Sure, a review where(if it's true and I ,personally, don't feel it is about MH3)the writer sticks with a game to the end to note that "it gets better after the first bazillion hours of stifling effin ennui" may well be more accurate in some regards but I doubt it's any more honest and that should always be the most important thing when giving your opinion on something people are being asked to shell out actual money and time for and on.

Sorry for the rant. Sorry for the length of my rant(first time I ever ended that particular sentence with "rant").

 

[mike1921]

You won't like the game if you have never played Monster Hunter before and they just thrust you into the meat of the game, and you won't like the game if you think the tutorial is too long. Basically there are two kinds (maybe three?) people who do not like this game.

Group A) The people who made is past the 1* quests, fought some big monsters, do not like how tedious the game can be
Group B) The people who played only 1* quests and hated the game

and then...

Group C) The people who use either group A or Bs opinion to hate the game

Most people who have played Monster Hunter and didn't like it are group B, you can see this in a lot of reviews (worst being Gametrailers review of Monster Hunter Freedom, where they had to out right lie to try to prove their point). This includes Yahtzee. People like to point out flaws in people's opinions, that's why there are a lot of people pointing out this review.

It can be summed up that Yahtzee did not review the game, he reviewed the tutorial, which he doesn't like. The thing is, his review says this is what the whole game is like, which it is not.

What about
Group D) People who use the opinion's of people who actually like the game. To hate it.

People trying to defend this game made me hate the game way more than anything yahtzee said. Anything that got me into a conversation about the game's tutorial would. Infact, yahtzee actually defended the game way better than you did by mistake, because he said

but now I've spotted some of those quick, whippy little bastards and want to switch to a shortsword and shield?

Which comfirmed that there actually are weapons other than sledge hammers, massive swords, massive spears, and all the other giant heavy slow shit. I was under the impression that all the weapons were heavy shit because: First some guy posted some youtube videos showing people beat bosses as if it were an arguement that the game doesn't suck (all of them with retardedly huge weapons), and then if I asked if all weapons are that huge no one bothered responding that they're not

 

[Kai XIII]

Sure is agree with yAHtzhee in here.

It's a good game, get over yourselves

Yes, how dare we agree with yahtzee that a game you like sucks. Obviously if you say it's a good game it must be, all mighty person with 10 posts.

u mad?

 

[Reverend Del]

To the good fellow who commented on a user's post count. Be informed thusly: post count is not a measure of competency or intellect. Merely propensity to post.

The fact the post itself was lamer than a pirate with two wooden legs could have been drawn attention to in a better fashion.

There will always be fanboys and always be haters. Some fanboys will be intelligent and believe that a game's flaws are compensated for by it's inherent good points, others will be those who arrived late to the party and had to jump onto the proverbial bandwagon, others still will have no clue and will merely spout for the sake of spouting. The haters are much the same, only believing that games flaws outweigh the good points.

If I were to take a Vorlon approach to the truth of this game I would conclude that it is average, good points and bad polarising it's fans and detractors.

That is my opinion, and however wrong you folks might think I am, I am right enough in my own mind not to care unless you can come up with a reasoned approach to changing my mind on the matter. Simply shouting and raving at me or other's is not going to do that.

Some valid and interesting points have been raised by both sides, but I for one cannot get past the fact that 90 minutes of gizzard collecting isn't my idea of fun. No matter what happens after that.

 

[shadowmarth]

What about
Group D) People who use the opinion's of people who actually like the game. To hate it.

People trying to defend this game made me hate the game way more than anything yahtzee said. Anything that got me into a conversation about the game's tutorial would. Infact, yahtzee actually defended the game way better than you did by mistake, because he said

but now I've spotted some of those quick, whippy little bastards and want to switch to a shortsword and shield?

Which comfirmed that there actually are weapons other than sledge hammers, massive swords, massive spears, and all the other giant heavy slow shit. I was under the impression that all the weapons were heavy shit because: First some guy posted some youtube videos showing people beat bosses as if it were an arguement that the game doesn't suck (all of them with retardedly huge weapons), and then if I asked if all weapons are that huge no one bothered responding that they're not

Most of the weapons are HUGE. That's just how it goes. There's also Bowgunning, which is an entirely different experience. You know the thing about Sword and Shield though? It hits pretty weak compared to the bigger weapons (obviously), so you have to hit more often. Which is doable. But you also have to keep a variety of swords around because maximizing elemental damage is key to doing well with Sword and Shield. It's not exactly the best noob weapon.

 

[BrilliantCircle]

As I've stated before, my problem with the video is that he didn't review the actual game.
...
I was looking forward to a proper nip picking and what I got was Yahtzee whining about his job.
.

AGAIN YOU ARENT PAYING ATTENTION.

yes, he reviewed the actual damn game. he played and found it to be a tedious crapathon

also, that was 100% nit picking of the game, what the hell are you reading?

He did not review the game, he reviewed the tutorial. People who have actually played Monster Hunter would tell you the game is about hunting big monsters to gather material from them to fight even bigger and harder monsters.

It is not about gathering mushrooms or honey (like in Yahtzee's review) or hunting a bunch of small monsters (like in Yahtzee's review). Doing these things though, TEACH you about the game and MAY help you later. For example, fighting small monsters can help you learn how to time your attacks/dodges/blocks. Gathering can help you make items to help you fight big monsters, for example, you are low on health, but you know where ingredients are in the level to make potions so you can continue fighting.

These skills that you learn become pointless once you start PLAYING the game. You know how to take advantage on monster's movements and you know to be prepared for missions (you'll also have enough money now to just buy what you need from the store). Does this sound like anything from Yahtzee's review?

 

[camazotz]

I am surprised that no one really gets the basic message Yahtzee was enunciating here: That if a game can't manage to appeal to you in X hours then it's not going to appeal to you inb 2X or even 3X hours. And even if it did, is wading through the initial round of suck worth a potential pay-off on hearsay? I've experienced many games like that....and I rarely give a game more than 1 hour if I find it's not to my liking; I have a much, much lower tolerance level for suck than Yahtzee (plus I don't have to do a video review, thank the evil game gods).

Whether it's a tutorial that takes (seemingly) forever or just normal gameplay (that feels like a bad tutorial) the bottom line is: hours in to the game none of the gameplay appealed to Yahtzee. And ergo I am reasnably confident it will not appeal to me, as I have found that about 75% of the time if Yahtzee finds a game's drag preposterous and torturous, so will I. About the only time I saw one of his reviews and it said, "this game has moments of suck, but the payoff for hanging in there is kinda cool (I'm paraphrasing here obviously) it was with Dark Void, which I did go get (once I saw it for ten bucks) based on what Yahtzee said. And he was right.

The last time I ignored Yahtzee, it was at my peril--I picked up Wet despite his review, thinking I could overlook it all and find the coolness within. I was wrong.

Damnit, Yahtzee is always right. ALWAYS.

 

[Atmos Duality]

10 hour tutorial??

TEN???

Fuck no. You're a class A idiot if you claimed this game had a 10 hour tutorial.
I spent maybe 2 tops going through the entire tutorial and the set for all the weapons on my first try. Half of that was optional. 1 hour for a tutorial is par for the course with most games released today. Usually it's integrated into the opening missions and trickled out as the game goes along.

Anyone who thinks that this game takes 10 hours to get running has lost their bloody mind.

Monster Hunter might be a massive pain in the ass, and it might have unfair levels of grind in it, but it does not take 10 bloody hours to get to the good hunts.

 

[shadowmarth]

I am surprised that no one really gets the basic message Yahtzee was enunciating here: That if a game can't manage to appeal to you in X hours then it's not going to appeal to you inb 2X or even 3X hours. And even if it did, is wading through the initial round of suck worth a potential pay-off on hearsay? I've experienced many games like that....and I rarely give a game more than 1 hour if I find it's not to my liking; I have a much, much lower tolerance level for suck than Yahtzee (plus I don't have to do a video review, thank the evil game gods).

Whether it's a tutorial that takes (seemingly) forever or just normal gameplay (that feels like a bad tutorial) the bottom line is: hours in to the game none of the gameplay appealed to Yahtzee. And ergo I am reasnably confident it will not appeal to me, as I have found that about 75% of the time if Yahtzee finds a game's drag preposterous and torturous, so will I. About the only time I saw one of his reviews and it said, "this game has moments of suck, but the payoff for hanging in there is kinda cool (I'm paraphrasing here obviously) it was with Dark Void, which I did go get (once I saw it for ten bucks) based on what Yahtzee said. And he was right.

The last time I ignored Yahtzee, it was at my peril--I picked up Wet despite his review, thinking I could overlook it all and find the coolness within. I was wrong.

Damnit, Yahtzee is always right. ALWAYS.

If Yahtzee was always right then there would be no good games. That's absurd. And Wet is the polar opposite of this game. Wet is a shallow story and style-driven shooter. This is an action game about fighting giant monsters that has immense replay value.

 

[NamesAreHardToPick]

Weapon wear and repair was thought up by morons for moorons. if you enjoy it in a game, guess which group you are in? The rates are abritrary at best and malicious at worst. They are simply mechanics to reduce player resources and prolong the game by making you do chores. Take a solid metal hammer and start hitting an anvil. Count how many hits it takes to break the hammer. For best results, hold your breath while you count. Light your house on fire and see if you can break the hammer before it burns down around you.

I totally agree. Super Mario Bros was a crap game because it's totally unrealistic that I'd be killed by a turtle or a mushroom walking in to me. Also where's the ground? Doesn't he breathe when he's swimming?

TL;DR - I'm being sarcastic. Videogames aren't supposed to be true to real life, anyone who compares one to a real-world situation has an invalid point.

The function of dulling your weapon, in Tri is to force you from offense to defense every now and then... it's a minor crisis situation you have to deal with. You can keep hitting the monster and hope it retreats, or you can figure out how to extract yourself from the room without becoming a snack. Similarly your fight will be interrupted by needs like hunger, needing potions to protect you from harsh environments, and so on.

The ten hour, 90 minute, 5 minute, whatever-it's-down-to-now tutorial complaint is still ridiculous. How is something worth doing if it doesn't take any time to learn how to do? Jump into a new game, start mashing buttons, whee you win! Even in videogaming it's a completely unrealistic expectation. While I how to play Lost Planet 2 already, there's a different map on this week's faction battle. I learned it over the course of a couple of hours... spawn points, weapon pick-ups, vehicles, control posts, fields of fire for turrets, etc. Gradually I went from one of the worst players, to just bad, and eventually sort of good. Maybe after a couple rounds tonight I'll be the unremarkable mid-tier player I'm truly capable of and then lord my knowledge over new recruits by grabbing the sniper rifle first and doling out bodily orfices on the un-enlightened.

The tutorial period matters in Monster Hunter... if you don't know how to swat fast human-sized targets with a hammer the size of a european car by the time you're done, you stand zero chance of hitting the same sized target now attached to the business end of an enraged fantasy dinosaur while the whole monster chases you all over the map tackling and breathing fire and spinning around to slap you with its tail. Even at that, you may have to spend an hour or two learning the specifics of the monster's attacks and territory before you're sufficiently armed (with knowledge) to beat the thing down. Sure you could play some other game that had you killing equally impressive enemies with the touch of a single button, but how do you get a sense of accomplishment from that? Monster Hunter is for people who want to take pride in a hard job well done (or done at all, in some cases) and sharing your accomplishments with other players who can appreciate your skill and dedication.

 

[BrilliantCircle]

You won't like the game if you have never played Monster Hunter before and they just thrust you into the meat of the game, and you won't like the game if you think the tutorial is too long. Basically there are two kinds (maybe three?) people who do not like this game.

Group A) The people who made is past the 1* quests, fought some big monsters, do not like how tedious the game can be
Group B) The people who played only 1* quests and hated the game

and then...

Group C) The people who use either group A or Bs opinion to hate the game

Most people who have played Monster Hunter and didn't like it are group B, you can see this in a lot of reviews (worst being Gametrailers review of Monster Hunter Freedom, where they had to out right lie to try to prove their point). This includes Yahtzee. People like to point out flaws in people's opinions, that's why there are a lot of people pointing out this review.

It can be summed up that Yahtzee did not review the game, he reviewed the tutorial, which he doesn't like. The thing is, his review says this is what the whole game is like, which it is not.

What about
Group D) People who use the opinion's of people who actually like the game. To hate it.

People trying to defend this game made me hate the game way more than anything yahtzee said. Anything that got me into a conversation about the game's tutorial would. Infact, yahtzee actually defended the game way better than you did by mistake, because he said

but now I've spotted some of those quick, whippy little bastards and want to switch to a shortsword and shield?

Which comfirmed that there actually are weapons other than sledge hammers, massive swords, massive spears, and all the other giant heavy slow shit. I was under the impression that all the weapons were heavy shit because: First some guy posted some youtube videos showing people beat bosses as if it were an arguement that the game doesn't suck (all of them with retardedly huge weapons), and then if I asked if all weapons are that huge no one bothered responding that they're not

How is this the game's fault then? Yes there other weapons. None of the weapons are slow and none of them are fast, in a sense. A weapon may attack more, but you'll almost never have time to attack that much or else the monster will hit you. A slow weapon, for example, may give you only 1 opportunity to attack, but you may do enough damage in that 1 attack than 3 of a faster weapon.

All the monsters are designed to be fought with every weapon. You don't need a fast weapon on a fast monster, it's all about timing and learning how the weapons work.