Support NeoGAF

[extralite]

And theres no rule saying they would have to do so for vita if they had gone with vita.

Because graphics don't matter and Capcom are known to not push hardware? MH looks good on PS2, PSP, Wii and 3DS. It's merely okay on PS3 and Wii U.

There is a reason why FFXIII is the best selling PS3 game and DD is the best selling new IP on PS3.

Graphics aren't everything but they're far from unimportant.

Since players of the Wii/U versions probably wouldn't be able to play together with PS3 users, I doubt that a whole lot of people would make platform change that requires them to start from the beginning.

The game runs on SE's servers, why wouldn't you be able to play cross platform?

 

[Dalthien]

There is a reason why FFXIII is the best selling PS3 game and DD is the best selling new IP on PS3.

Graphics aren't everything but they're far from unimportant.

I'll grant you that graphics can be very important for some games, and nearly irrelevant for other games.

But graphics is not the reason that FFXIII was the best-selling title on PS3. The brand is the reason. The only brands with the sales track record of Final Fantasy in Japan are Dragon Quest, Monster Hunter, and a whole slew of Nintendo brands. Final Fantasy is the only one of those brands that got a main entry on the PS3, so it was a pretty safe bet that it would have been the best-selling game on PS3, even if they had half-assed the graphics and focused more on the story and interactivity in the game.

 

[Jinfash]

Even though I'm impressed with how the Vita is resisting major drops (considering software sales), I think everyone who predicted 75k for 28 days will be right on the money.

 

[Chris1964]

I really don't think it's going to do MHP3rd numbers. Define "sell well" in this case.

So how much will it sell? 1,2,3, or 4 millions?

Nintendo would not pay for MH.
Face it.?

Nintendo paid with one way or the other for Monster Hunter exclusivity. Face it.

 

[metalslimer]

Even though I'm impressed with how the Vita is resisting major drops (considering software sales), I think everyone who predicted 75k for 28 days will be right on the money.

I think that might be a little low. I'll just make a random prediction of 25k-20k-15k-18k

There is just no way in hell it stays at 25k when there is not a single release for almost 3 weeks and the predictions above 100k are kind of baffling

So how much will it sell? 1,2,3, or 4 millions?

.5, obviously 3ds owners have seen the light

 

[extralite]

But graphics is not the reason that FFXIII was the best-selling title on PS3. The brand is the reason.

Not the only reason. Square's SNES success and the rise of FF as a brand is linked to the graphical advances they made. They're interdependent. Graphics may not even be the most important ingredient in what made FF so successful but it is a crucial one, also supporting the other aspects like story and characters that players appreciate in the series.

 

[test_account]

Nintendo would not pay for MH.
Face it. If the DS could run MH it would have had it.

It makes sense to Capcom not to be competing with the 3DS. If Sony won't support its handhelds then why on earth should Capcom AND have to pay Sony for it?

Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony would pay for Monster Hunter if that is what it takes to get the game on their platform, i'm 100% sure of that. If Nintendo in specific payed to get MH on 3DS, or if Capcom wouls have chosen the 3DS regardless, that is anyones' guess though. I guess that is what you mean, but i'm pretty sure that all the console companies would be willing to pay for MH if needed.

Why would Capcom have to pay Sony? Do you mean to pay royalties? If so, that applies to Nintendo as well. All of the console manufacturers takes royalties from the 3d parties.

 

[Dalthien]

Not the only reason. Square's SNES success and the rise of FF as a brand is linked to the graphical advances they made. They're interdependent. Graphics may not even be the most important ingredient in what made FF so successful but it is a crucial one, also supporting the other aspects like story and characters that players appreciate in the series.

Oh yeah - FF has clearly become associated with graphical presentation through the years - but that's historical context. I'm just speaking about FFXIII in particular. It could have been less graphically ambitious than it was, and focused more on other areas of gameplay, and I don't think anyone would doubt that it would still be the best-selling title of PS3. It's the only one of the top-tier brands that was released on PS3, so there really wasn't any competition for the title of "best-seller on PS3".

 

[Jamix012]

Not the only reason. Square's SNES success and the rise of FF as a brand is linked to the graphical advances they made. They're interdependent. Graphics may not even be the most important ingredient in what made FF so successful but it is a crucial one, also supporting the other aspects like story and characters that players appreciate in the series.

I disagree completely. Graphics have almost nothing to do with the sales of a series (I say almost because ok maybe 1% of sales of FF13 were due to graphical enhancements.) Many of the best selling games of all time in Japan are Pokemon: A series not know for pushing the boundaries graphically.
Why do 2D marios outsell 3D marios? Graphically the Mario Galaxy games are much more graphically intense then their 2D counterparts, yet the 2D ones outsell them massively. Sure other factors may be involved, but when the Galaxy games get higher review scores as well you've got to suspect that Japan is enlarge "indifferent" to graphical fidelity.

 

[extralite]

It's the only one of the "major" brands that was released on PS3, so there really wasn't any competition for the title of "best-seller on PS3".

There was competition: RE5 and 6. Also pretty games. All the games that came close were graphical showcases.

Brands that can actually best FF in sales and that could have gone to PS3 really only include DQ. Anyway, if there had been a game to rival FFXIII's sales on PS3, you can be sure it would at least have utilised the PS3's graphics to an extent to clearly distinguish them from PS2.

 

[extralite]

I disagree completely. Graphics have almost nothing to do with the sales of a series (I say almost because ok maybe 1% of sales of FF13 were due to graphical enhancements.)

You have no evidence for this. Also the enhancements don't matter. What is important is that fans of the series have come to expect graphics that wow them.

Many of the best selling games of all time in Japan are Pokemon: A series not know for pushing the boundaries graphically.
Why do 2D marios outsell 3D marios? Graphically the Mario Galaxy games are much more graphically intense then their 2D counterparts, yet the 2D ones outsell them massively. Sure other factors may be involved, but when the Galaxy games get higher review scores as well you've got to suspect that Japan is enlarge "indifferent" to graphical fidelity.

I never suggested that sales would be proportional to quality of graphics, only that they would factor into the appeal of games. And more importantly, I'm arguing that devs and publishers are relying on graphics to some extent to sell their games. If they weren't why would they put effort into graphics at all?

 

[Dalthien]

There was competition: RE5 and 6.

No. The Resident Evil brand is not competition for Final Fantasy in Japan. That's just crazy talk. Particularly before FFXIII (the graphical showpiece) came out and shit on the brand's popularity. (Unless you were talking about graphical competition - but the talk about "Best of" was in reference to sales, so I'm assuming you were somehow comparing RE to FF in sales potential.)

Brands that can actually best FF in sales and that could have gone to PS3 really only include DQ.

Exactly - that's my point. Without DQ (or Nintendo's brands) coming to PS3, there was no question what the top-seller was going to be. Be honest now - if FFXIII was less impressive graphically (still somewhere above PS2 levels - but a step down from some of the other graphically impressive games on PS3), but had a strong story, compelling characters, etc. - do you think it would still have been the best-selling game on PS3? If you say no, then you may be just about the only one on this board to believe that.

Anyway, if there had been a game to rival FFXIII's sales on PS3, you can be sure it would at least have utilised the PS3's graphics to an extent to clearly distinguish them from PS2.

Of course. Competent devs always make some use of the tools that are available to them. Graphics get better as time goes on - well yeah.

 

[test_account]

I disagree completely. Graphics have almost nothing to do with the sales of a series (I say almost because ok maybe 1% of sales of FF13 were due to graphical enhancements.) Many of the best selling games of all time in Japan are Pokemon: A series not know for pushing the boundaries graphically.
Why do 2D marios outsell 3D marios? Graphically the Mario Galaxy games are much more graphically intense then their 2D counterparts, yet the 2D ones outsell them massively. Sure other factors may be involved, but when the Galaxy games get higher review scores as well you've got to suspect that Japan is enlarge "indifferent" to graphical fidelity.

True that graphics isnt the sole selling point of a game indeed, but graphics are often used as a selling point. Otherwise it wouldnt be need to keep improving the graphics, which a lot of developers do. A bad game will not be saved by good graphics, but a game that is both good and have good graphics will not get it's sales hurt by having good graphics

EDIT: extralite already mentioned something similar =)

 

[Jamix012]

No. The Resident Evil brand is not competition for Final Fantasy in Japan. That's just crazy talk. Particularly before FFXIII (the graphical showpiece) came out and shit on the brand's popularity.


Exactly - that's my point. Without DQ (or Nintendo's brands) coming to PS3, there was no question what the top-seller was going to be. Be honest now - if FFXIII was less impressive graphically, but had a strong story, compelling characters, etc. - do you think it would still have been best-selling game on PS3? If you say no, then you may be just about the only one on this board to believe that.


Of course. Competent devs always make some use of the tools that are available to them. Graphics get better as time goes on - well yeah.

I beleive it would have still been the best selling game on the PS3 and the insinuation that I'd be alone is crazy. In fact I'm pretty sure I'm in the overwhelming majority here. Like I wouldn't be surprised if ten times as many people beleived that it would still be the best selling PS3 game under the situation you mentioned than not. (At least in Japan) Edit: Yeah I'm an idiot.

True that graphics isnt the sole selling point of a game indeed, but graphics are often used as a selling point. Otherwise it wouldnt be need to keep improving the graphics, which a lot of developers do. A bad game will not be saved by good graphics, but a game that is both good and have good graphics will not get it's sales hurt by having good graphics

EDIT: extralite already mentioned something similar =)

Sure graphics can help sales in a small way, but for the same price of production you could lower graphics a small amount and add more content, potentially selling more depending on the content.

 

[Dalthien]

I beleive it would have still been the best selling game on the PS3 and the insinuation that I'd be alone is crazy. In fact I'm pretty sure I'm in the overwhelming majority here. Like I wouldn't be surprised if ten times as many people beleived that it would still be the best selling PS3 game under the situation you mentioned than not. (At least in Japan)

Then you agreed with me - ha ha.

 

[DaBoss]

I think that might be a little low. I'll just make a random prediction of 25k-20k-15k-18k

There is just no way in hell it stays at 25k when there is not a single release for almost 3 weeks and the predictions above 100k are kind of baffling

Yea I can see it going this way too.

.5, obviously 3ds owners have seen the light

That isn't the correct reasoning, 3DS owners are only worth 1/6 of a person.

Spoiler

Sorry about that lol.

 

[extralite]

No. The Resident Evil brand is not competition for Final Fantasy in Japan. That's just crazy talk. Particularly before FFXIII (the graphical showpiece) came out and shit on the brand's popularity.


Exactly - that's my point. Without DQ (or Nintendo's brands) coming to PS3, there was no question what the top-seller was going to be. Be honest now - if FFXIII was less impressive graphically (still somewhere above PS2 levels - but a step down from some of the other graphically impressive games on PS3), but had a strong story, compelling characters, etc. - do you think it would still have been the best-selling game on PS3? If you say no, then you may be just about the only one on this board to believe that.

FFXIII could have sold just a bit more than half of what it sold and it would have still been the best selling PS3 game. But then RE and ToX would have come closer to besting it. My point is, FF as a brand became as big as it is because it has been pushing graphics. Capcom has successfully launched new franchises because they have been pushing graphics.

MH with upscaled SD graphics on Vita would have impacted its sales perspective further. What really limited that perspective was the price point so I don't really want to stress the graphics part. I just find it hard to believe that Capcom would not have felt the need to update graphics for a hypothetical Vita version.

 

[Dalthien]

FFXIII could have sold just a bit more than half of what it sold and it would have still been the best selling PS3 game.

Which is why the graphics were such a minor consideration in this particular discussion that we're having. The brand already predetermined what the best-selling game was going to be, regardless of what graphical direction they decided to go with for FFXIII. (And the longer the series keeps focusing on graphics, the further the series seems to continue falling in Japan - not necessarily a direct correlation, but an interesting observation).

As another interesting observation, it's worth pointing out that of all the top-tier brands in Japan, FF is the only one that really pushes graphics to such a degree. Monster Hunter found it's success on portables. DQ had its most successful entry ever on the DS of all things - and Nintendo's brands (Pokemon, 2D Mario, Animal Crossing, Brain Age, Mario Kart, Tomodochi, Wii Sports, Wii Fit, etc.) are far from graphical powerhouses.

So it kind of diminishes the impact of graphics in Japan in the current landscape.

 

[DangerousDave]

No MH switched because Capcom realized they had a much better opportunity to expand on the 3DS along with some likely incentives. By your logic, most new games would go to wiiu this coming generation. They could have easily kept the same assets for Vita.

No. MH switched because Capcom didn't make any exclusive game for any Sony machine in the last 7 years, since Ultimate Ghost & Goblins. All the other games, including MH, has been ports or multiplatform games.

 

[extralite]

As another interesting observation, it's worth pointing out that of all the top-tier brands in Japan, FF is the only one that really pushes graphics to such a degree. Monster Hunter found it's success on portables. DQ had its most successful entry ever on the DS of all things - and Nintendo's brands (Pokemon, 2D Mario, Animal Crossing, Brain Age, Mario Kart, Tomodochi, Wii Sports, Wii Fit, etc.) are far from graphical powerhouses.

As I said, MH looks good for a PSP game. DQIX looks good for a DS game. RE pushes graphics to a similar degree as FF. They all push their hardware. I can't see MH on Vita not doing this.

And you cannot admit graphics were part in making the FF brand and then argue it is suddenly seperate from its brand appeal. If graphics were not as good, or downright bad there is no guarantee it would have sold as well as it did.

My points stand. Publishers value graphics and on Playstation at least practically all the big successes also had a considerable budget showing on the graphics side.

Edit: And all the Nintendo games you mention look good for the hardware they're on.

 

[electroplankton]

No. MH switched because Capcom didn't make any exclusive game for any Sony machine in the last 7 years, since Ultimate Ghost & Goblins. All the other games, including MH, has been ports or multiplatform games.

I thought MHP games on PSP were exclusives (as long as all MH spin-offs).

 

[Dalthien]

They all push their hardware. I can't see MH on Vita not doing this.

I never said a thing about MH Vita though.

And you cannot admit graphics were part in making the FF brand and then argue it is suddenly seperate from its brand appeal.

I never made this argument either.

I was just arguing that FFXIII (that one game, not the history of the series) was the best-selling game on PS3 because of its brand. If you agree that a lesser graphically focused, more story/character/gameplay focused FFXIII would have still been the best-selling PS3 game, then you agree with me. If you think that hypothetical FFXIII that I just mentioned wouldn't have even reached 1M in sales, then we disagree.

They all push their hardware.

Edit: And all the Nintendo games you mention look good for the hardware they're on.

Of course they do - these are top-tier franchises with quality devs working on them. They're going to use the tools that are available to them and make an appealing product. Nobody's arguing otherwise.

 

[Wynnebeck]

I never said a thing about MH Vita though.


I never made this argument either.

I was just arguing that FFXIII (that one game, not the history of the series) was the best-selling game on PS3 because of its brand. If you agree that a lesser graphically focused, more story/character/gameplay focused FFXIII would have still been the best-selling PS3 game, then you agree with me. If you think that hypothetical FFXIII that I just mentioned wouldn't have even reached 1M in sales, then we disagree.

Not necessarily. I can't remember where I saw the chart for FF sales but we had a huge difference in sales after FFVII going through 8 and 9 before they surged again for FFX. If the brand was as strong as you are suggesting, shouldn't those entries have sold gangbusters as well? It's pretty easy to see that having a more graphical and grander looking FF on a new platform hooked people in. Granted, the brand did lure people but once they saw the actual game, they went in the rest of the way.

 

[Chris1964]

No. MH switched because Capcom didn't make any exclusive game for any Sony machine in the last 7 years, since Ultimate Ghost & Goblins. All the other games, including MH, has been ports or multiplatform games.

What platform did Monster Hunter Portable, Monster Hunter Diary and Monster Hunter Puzzle release on?

 

[extralite]

I never said a thing about MH Vita though.

That was the context of my post though. Publishers use graphics to get good sale results and Capcom is one of the prime examples. Only SE bests them in this, both graphics and sales. Which is why I brought them both up. That and the fact they're the commercial kings on PS3.

We can argue exactly how much the success of FF is related to graphics all you want (I don't), but you have no proof for your assumption and my point stands. If you choose to ignore the point and drag me into a discussion neither side can proof I will choose to not answer anymore.

Of course they do - these are top-tier franchises with quality devs working on them. They're going to use the tools that are available to them and make an appealing product. Nobody's arguing otherwise.

Metalslimer was. He implied that Capcom could just as well have made an upscaled SD MH on Vita.

I never made this argument either.

I made the argument. You admitted that historically the series has become associated with good graphics. I now realize that you fail to admit that graphics were also what made the series as big as it is.

 

[Dalthien]

Not necessarily. I can't remember where I saw the chart for FF sales but we had a huge difference in sales after FFVII going through 8 and 9 before they surged again for FFX. If the brand was as strong as you are suggesting, shouldn't those entries have sold gangbusters as well? It's pretty easy to see that having a more graphical and grander looking FF on a new platform hooked people in. Granted, the brand did lure people but once they saw the actual game, they went in the rest of the way.

For Japan, FF has been on a steady decline ever since FF8 (not counting budget releases - I'm too lazy to add those in right now). But yeah - the brand being so strong from the PS1/PS2 days is why it didn't matter what they did with FFXIII on PS3. The FF brand was so far above any of the other brands that did come to PS3, that FFXIII could experience a MASSIVE plunge in sales on the PS3, and still be the best-selling game on the platform.

 

[jeremy1456]

Hmm? It dropped 10K this week with releases. Are you expecting it to not drop a lot? I expect a 17K baseline for the Vita.

Wii U is probably going to be 8K baseline.

What steady stream of new software is going to raise the Vita baseline?

No price drop alone has ever raised a baseline, so why do people think it's going to magically happen here?

 

[Dalthien]

If you choose to ignore the point and drag me into a discussion neither side can proof I will choose to not answer anymore.

I'm not sure what point you think I'm arguing then. I was simply arguing your assertion that FFXIII was the best selling game on PS3 because it was a graphical showpiece. I feel confident that even if it wouldn't have been a graphical showpiece, it still would have been the best-selling game on the platform.

But yeah - the discussion seems to have run its course.

Metalslimer was. He implied that Capcom could just as well have made an upscaled SD MH on Vita.

Well, they did just that for both the PS3 and WiiU versions. So its certainly possible that they would have done the same for Vita.

If the Vita version was a completely new game built from scratch, then of course they would have designed it around the Vita hardware. If it was mostly just a port, then they very well may have just upscaled things. It's not an outrageous suggestion - they've done it before with the same series.

 

[extralite]

But yeah - the brand being so strong from the PS1/PS2 days is why it didn't matter what they did with FFXIII on PS3.

But what exactly made it so strong? This started on the SNES already but sales exploded when Square started to outclass practically everyone graphically.

Well, they did just that for both the PS3 and WiiU versions. So its certainly possible that they would have done the same for Vita.

If the Vita version was a completely new game built from scratch, then of course they would have designed it around the Vita hardware. If it was mostly just a port, then they very well may have just upscaled things. It's not an outrageous suggestion - they've done it before with the same series.

Agree 100%. And since the hypothetical Vita exclusive MH4 would have been very expensive to develop but would hardly sold anywhere near PSP/3DS MH thanks to the high price point, 3DS MH4 was a no brainer. Lower cost, higher sales.

 

[Dalthien]

But what exactly made it so strong? This started on the SNES already but sales exploded when Square started to outclass practically everyone graphically.

Agreed. I've never argued otherwise (nor would I).

 

[extralite]

Agreed. I've never argued otherwise (nor would I).

I brought up FFXIII being the best selling PS3 game thanks to graphics. You argued it wasn't due to graphics but to brand strength. Since you now admit that brand strength resulted from graphical achievement, how is my point challenged at all?

 

[Dalthien]

I brought up FFXIII being the best selling PS3 game thanks to graphics. You argued it wasn't due to graphics but to brand strength. Since you now admit that brand strength resulted from graphical achievement, how is my point challenged at all?

Because they are related, but separate. Graphics is an important aspect of the FF brand, but so are other elements - story/characters/gameplay/etc.

In addition, the focus on graphics is a decision made separately for each new game. The brand strength carries on across games, and takes longer to change. They can suddenly decide that they want to focus FFXIII on the story/characters/gameplay, and put less focus on the graphics for that particular game. But the brand strength that has carried over from past installments will still carry over to FFXIII, even if they shift the graphical focus.

After they've made a game or two with a lesser focus on graphics, greater focus on story/gameplay/etc, then the brand strength will start to change as people decide if they like the new focus or not. The brand strength may get stronger if people like the new focus, or it may weaken if people don't like the new focus. But brand strength is more of an evolutionary beast, of which graphics is but one part. The graphics themselves are a game-to-game decision. (That's why sequels to a successful well-received game tend to sell well, even if the sequel itself is shit. And sequels to poorly-received games have a much harder time finding success, because they're stuck with the branding issues caused by the previous game - XIII-2 seems like a relevant example to the conversation).

Not sure how well I explained all that - but there you go.

Edit - In the end, I think we're just focusing on different timeframes. You're saying that FFXIII was the PS3 best-seller because of the past focus on graphics. I took you to mean that FFXIII was the PS3 best-seller because of XIII's focus on graphics. Two different things.

 

[DangerousDave]

What platform did Monster Hunter Portable, Monster Hunter Diary and Monster Hunter Puzzle release on?

You're right with MH Diary and MH Puzzle (I didn't know about them), but MH Portable is a enhanced port of Monster Hunter G.

Probably there should be some other Capcom exclusive games on PSP/PS3/Vita, but all on the japanese market. I didn't remember any other "big" (big enought to have a worldwide release) Capcom game being Sony exclusive.

 

[DaBoss]

You're right with MH Diary and MH Puzzle (I didn't know about them), but MH Portable is a enhanced port of Monster Hunter G.

Probably there should be some other Capcom exclusive games on PSP/PS3/Vita, but all on the japanese market. I didn't remember any other "big" (big enought to have a worldwide release) Capcom game being Sony exclusive.

I don't remember any other "big" Capcom game being MS exclusive. I don't see what you're trying to say here.

 

[DangerousDave]

I don't remember any other "big" Capcom game being MS exclusive. I don't see what you're trying to say here.

Dead Rising (btw, they made a Dead Rising Wii exclusive ripoff, but never worried to port the game on PS3) or Steel Battalion.

And tons of Wii, DS and some 3DS ones.

Or, for example, having MH Frontier for 360 (in JP), and never worried about making a PS3 version, even if PS3 userbase is way higher in japan.

What I'm saying is that Capcom relationships with Sony doesn't seem to be the same than when Capcom did most of Sony exclusives. So I'm sure that Capcom won't made a Vita MH (or any exclusive game). The best that Sony can dream is to have a late port of 3DS MH.

 

[DaBoss]

Dead Rising (btw, they made a Dead Rising Wii exclusive ripoff, but never worried to port the game on PS3) or Steel Battalion.

And tons of Wii, DS and some 3DS ones.

Or, for example, having MH Frontier for 360 (in JP), and never worried about making a PS3 version, even if PS3 userbase is way higher in japan.

What I'm saying is that Capcom relationships with Sony doesn't seem to be the same than when Capcom did most of Sony exclusives. So I'm sure that Capcom won't made a Vita MH (or any exclusive game). The best that Sony can dream is to have a late port of 3DS MH.

Dead Rising came out in September 2006 for the 360. The PS3 was not out by then. The remake for the Wii was just token support and came out 3 years after it first released. The year after, both the PS3 and the 360 had Dead Rising 2.

Steel Battalion is a game requiring Kinect along with the 360 controller. The PS3 doesn't have anything like Kinect. And either way, the game apparently is dogshit, so this is pretty meaningless.

Monster Hunter Frontier is an MMO for the PC and the 360. I imagine there is cross-play between them along with a moneyhat.

Barely any games are exclusive except for the ones that appear on Nintendo platforms. And it would seem pretty obvious as to why due to the userbases of both the 360 and PS3 being similar worldwide.

You're trying to make an issue out of an issue that isn't there. Times change and decisions change. The PS2 days and PSP days for Sony are gone. Third-parties want to go for both MS and Sony for home consoles. On the handheld side of things, the 3DS is capable of doing stuff that was possible on the PSP. And it is doing Capcom well, and has a lot of potential for them.

 

[Jonnyram]

So how much will it sell? 1,2,3, or 4 millions?

I think 2-2.5 million should be a safe bet. I don't think it'll reach 3 million though (not on its full price release; a budget release in 2014 should take it past this).

 

[schuelma]

I think 2-2.5 million should be a safe bet. I don't think it'll reach 3 million though (not on its full price release; a budget release in 2014 should take it past this).

I just can't see that- 3G sold 1.5 million and launched when the userbase was a lot smaller.

3 million seems pretty safe to me.

 

[Jonnyram]

I just can't see that- 3G sold 1.5 million and launched when the userbase was a lot smaller.

3 million seems pretty safe to me.

Why would 4 sell double what 3G did?

 

[schuelma]

Why would 4 sell double what 3G did?

Because it isn't an expansion of a game that came out 2 years before?

 

[Sammy Samusu]

All I know is MH3G is a pretty useless game if you live in Japan. It's a great game here in the west because we never got MHP3.

I say 3M+ for MH4.

Also, where the fuck is the MH spin-offs? Airu Village did wonders for MHP3.

 

[StreetsAhead]

Tomodachi Collection seems to be doing well. Wonder if it will end up outselling the original?

So many people seem excited to create celebrity Miis and have babies with them. -__-

 

[metalslimer]

Why would 4 sell double what 3G did?

Wow...lol, you really want believe...

Because it isn't an expansion of a game that came out 2 years before?

Dont you understand? Obviously it should have sold 4 million but the MH fanbase is patiently waiting for MH Vita

 

[serplux]

Tomodachi Collection seems to be doing well. Wonder if it will end up outselling the original?

So many people seem excited to create celebrity Miis and have babies with them. -__-

If it can do more than 3.6 million overall, I'll be stunned, to say the least.

 

[disco]

All I know is MH3G is a pretty useless game if you live in Japan. It's a great game here in the west because we never got MHP3.

I say 3M+ for MH4.

Also, where the fuck is the MH spin-offs? Airu Village did wonders for MHP3.

I am waiting for Capcom to announce this for release sometime before MH 4 launches.

They're leaving it a little late...

http://www.siliconera.com/2012/12/26/capcom-making-monster-hunter-poogie-racing-spinoff/

 

[AranhaHunter]

Am I crazy for thinking MH4 will sell over 4 million? MHP3 sold 4.5 million on PSP before any budget re-releases IIRC. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for MH4 to sell 4+ million, I actually expect it to be honest.

I don't think user base will play that big of a factor either. MHP3 released when PSP had a 16 million userbase, MH4 will release when the 3DS has a 11.5-12 million userbase but there comes a point where games don't exponentially increase or decrease based on userbase (for example, GTAV won't sell 50 million copies because there are 2x more PS3 and 360s out there).

 

[metalslimer]

Am I crazy for thinking MH4 will sell over 4 million? MHP3 sold 4.5 million on PSP before any budget re-releases IIRC. I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility for MH4 to sell 4+ million, I actually expect it to be honest.

I don't think user base will play that big of a factor either. MHP3 released when PSP had a 16 million userbase, MH4 will release when the 3DS has a 11.5-12 million userbase but there comes a point where games don't exponentially increase or decrease based on userbase (for example, GTAV won't sell 50 million copies because there are 2x more PS3 and 360s out there).

I think 3.5 is a lock. Where it goes from there is up in the air.

 

[StreetsAhead]

If it can do more than 3.6 million overall, I'll be stunned, to say the least.

Well, with many 1st party series being the best or close to best selling entries for their franchises ever, I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility.

 

[Jonnyram]

Because it isn't an expansion of a game that came out 2 years before?

Well, you probably know this already, but 3rd didn't sell double 2nd G either.
And I know Sammy Samusu is in here to correct me, but the MH fanbase in general seems to love the G expansions. 2nd G > 2nd, 3G > 3. But anyway, I digress.

 

[L Thammy]

I think that Capcom planned to invest several efforts on the 3DS and made efforts to develop the platform. For one thing, note the way Monster Hunter 4 and Resident Evil Revelations were prefaced by stepping stone games. Monster Hunter 3G and 4 were both unveiled at a Nintendo event, if I recall, and Revelations was featured heavily in earlier 3DS promotions.

Let's say Capcom had made a deal to lock Monster Hunter onto Vita. Well, they don't have a deal to stop making Vita games entirely: they've already made at least one. So if they were interested in investing in the platform, one would think they would have already done so with other games.

We've seen several Capcom games released for the 3DS that started development before launch. If Capcom started development on multiple Vita games before launch, where are they? Where are the signs that they existed? In fact, wasn't the big shock at Sony's TGS show after the MH4 announcement that Capcom was only talking about games they were porting to the system?

There's no way that deals weren't made. But I think that Capcom saw themselves as the big fish in the small PSP pond. They wanted a big userbase, and it was mutually beneficial for to Capcom and Nintendo to catalyze that.

Similarly, look at the enhanced port of Resident Evil Revelations. If we assume Capcom always like to port everything everywhere, it seems strange that there's no Vita version announced. They're making a PS3 version, aren't PS3-Vita ports supposed to be extremely easy? DuckTales and Chronicles of Mystara are similar, I think.

Other cases that may be related are Sengoku Basara 2 Heroes and Monster Hunter G. The both were ported - probably on the cheap - to the Wii. They both served as precursors to the next major entry in their series, both of which had the Wii as their lead platform.

Well, you probably know this already, but 3rd didn't sell double 2nd G either.
And I know Sammy Samusu is in here to correct me, but the MH fanbase in general seems to love the G expansions. 2nd G > 2nd, 3G > 3. But anyway, I digress.

To support Sammy's point. The new monsters in 2ndG versus 3G (excluding subspecies, which are modified versions of existing monsters):

2ndG: Brachydios, Dire Miralis
3G: Nargacuga, Queen Vespoid, King Shakalaka, Hypnocatrice, Lavasioth, Ukanlos

2nd G also added Felyne (one of MH's major mascot) companions. 3G does not have them, and it also lacks Tigrex (a highly popular monster that was already in Portable 3rd). 3G was also outsourced to Eighting and had fairly low projections (1.2 million or so), which implies that it was not considered to be a major title.