See I completely agree with the way the drop in and out stuff is would fit the handheld co-op stuff easy. Now if Capcom even does that who knows.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
See I completely agree with the way the drop in and out stuff is would fit the handheld co-op stuff easy. Now if Capcom even does that who knows.
Laplasakos
Member
Making the brand stronger in the west, which means more potential sales in the future for the franchise.
Gotdatmoney
Member
The franchise has no hope of growth if they lose all their domestic sales. There is only 1 system that can facilitate that growth. We all know what it is. This is where the whole thing about separate lines is dumb.
Eh, I don't think that MH can become an annual franchise in the west like they did in Japan. Those millions of MH western players are going to expect a revamped game every time. Unless you are a sport game tied to seasonal real life changes, western games expect a new game for every sequel.
Capcom's best bet for continued income from MH in the west is a successful GaaS model. Something I'm not fond of
.But they could have maintained their sales in Japan and still had potential for growth in the west.
Technically it'd be 3 + 1 is less than 1.5 + 4 for Gen 5 and 4 debuts.
Laplasakos
Member
The franchise stopped having growth in their domestic sales since Portable 3rd though. Also, they didn't lose their domestic sales after Tri, i doubt it will happen with World.
This is what I'm worried about going forward. I'm hoping Capcom shifts going forward into having one fully-multiplat Monster Hunter title, but if they try to pull having a "portable" line aimed specifically for Switch in Japan, it'll just muddy the existing ecosystem they are trying to set up with MHW to begin with.
Eh, I don't think that MH can become an annual franchise in the west like they did in Japan. Those millions of MH western players are going to expect a revamped game every time. Unless you are a sport game tied to seasonal real life changes, western games expect a new game for every sequel.
Capcom's best bet for continued income from MH in the west is a successful GaaS model. Something I'm not fond of
It's honestly not a bad route for MH to go in, since a lot of the legwork is already done to integrate it naturally. And for all the microtransactions fuckery that they get into, it's hard to argue with the amount of content that both Frontier and Online have respectively by being continually supported and updated. Getting that level of commitment from the mainline team is certainly tantalizing.
That being said, since Frontier is a straight-up Capcom game, I'm not sure if they can be trusted on a corporate level to do it in a way that's just right. Certainly not at this point, at least.
lyrick
Member
Domestic sales for Tri, were a strong part of why Portable 3 exists and did so well.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
Eh, I don't think that MH can become an annual franchise in the west like they did in Japan. Those millions of MH western players are going to expect a revamped game every time. Unless you are a sport game tied to seasonal real life changes, western games expect a new game for every sequel.
Capcom's best bet for continued income from MH in the west is a successful GaaS model. Something I'm not fond of
Eh? I didn't say they should make it an annual franchise. I mentioned this in another post, which you may not have seen, but I feel like they will go with a GaaS model, which actually makes more sense in this day and age that saturating the franchise with re-releases like they're currently doing.
What I'm pretty sure they're going to do is add in new monsters on a "seasonal" basis like in Street Fighter, and supplement that with the usual free DLC collaborations and event quests that MH is known for. New retail releases will be saved for when all paid DLC has been put out or for actual sequels.
And bad press coming from a draconian GaaS model is one of the things that can feck up the launch badly :/ .
Sorry if I misread you, but you did said consistent 2-3M (western) seller. I just don't see the model of big developing expenses for 2-3M sales being a sustainable one for the franchise.
perfectchaos007
Member
Sorry, but I wasn't implying Switch sales were poor/not improving, but that Pokken DX didn't sell well. People, including me, were fine double dipping for Mario Kart, but now that there's more games available for the system a port of a not-SSB fighting game just didn't excite me.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Portable 3 is the best selling third-party game in the history of Japan. I'm not seriously going to entertain an argument that because they lost sales from that it marks anything significant.
In regards to try the point I was making was it about domestic players leaving forever the point I was making is that they're not actually growing their fan base. Selling 4 million of game 1 and 4 million of game 2 instead of just selling 8 million of game 1 on a bigger install base and 8 million of game 2 on that same install base. That's the difference between growing and shifting.
Right, that is something that is giving me a lot of pause right now. As far as I'm concerned, I'm employing a strict "guilty until proven innocent" policy. All the cards need to be laid out on the table when they make their announcements, and even if they can't get into specifics about the exact monsters coming, they do need to make it clear on what the schedule is and what they plan to do for players that aren't willing to commit right away.
Herb Alpert
Banned
Your strategy is as strange as Capcom's.
What exactly are you expecting? That Monster Hunter grows into some 5m-selling titan in the west?
frankie_baby
Member
Ah i see, well its launched at a higher attach rate than it did on wii u so I'd say it did well, would expect it to pass the wii u version ltd by the holidays
ARMS is sliding off the top 30
It had a good run I suppose. I wish it was more though.
Famitsu has it up Week over Week...
MH as a franchise in total sales has grown on the 3DS. So regardless of the peak sales, more software has been sold on the 3DS than on the PSP.
Piece-meal DLC for monsters for an online game like this is cancer to your playerbase. Pretty sure Ridley and I had this discussion in another thread a few days ago. If they go that route, they're doing it to nickle-and-dime the audience they have much as they are with SF/MvCI (heaven forbid they start selling monster *colors* too).
Piece-meal DLC for monsters for an online game like this is cancer to your playerbase. Pretty sure Ridley and I had this discussion in another thread a few days ago. If they go that route, they're doing it to nickle-and-dime the audience they have much as they are with SF/MvCI (heaven forbid they start selling monster *colors* too).
Loot boxes with dem rare drops. Desire Sensor reaches its final form.
The day loot boxes infest MH is the day I stop buying Capcom games.
That is tricky. If they decide to go back to the download quest model for a Switch version, it is going to be extraordinarily difficult to justify continuing one's support for the PS4 version if you can get the Switch version and get all of the future content for free.
If they opted to charge for those quests, or even straight up kept the format the same by "encouraging" a constant online connection, I think you'll find a lot of players rejecting that as it runs counter to the pick up and play nature of the game.
In either event, a separate line might be the only reasonable way to handle it, but even then, you have to figure that with the gap between the Switch and PS4 being so much smaller than what would have happened if they tried this last gen, you still run right into a similar issue in the first point.
Interesting stuff to consider, and I fully expect Capcom to fuck it up royally.
MatrixMan.EXE
Member
That's why I say consistently 2-3m in the west. Those aren't really numbers to sniff at, and I think you're grossly overestimating how much this game is costing to make. It has higher production values than previous Monster Hunter games, but nothing shown of World screams insanely high budget, especially considering it's running on MT Framework and recycles animations from previous games.
Given that, and a strong DLC model, I think having a series that consistently does 2-3m in the west (Dark Souls numbers) is something that Capcom would be more than happy with + whatever they sell in Japan. This is partly why I was saying in my posts to Gotdatmoney that what would really solidify this as a great money maker is if they had a Switch version to help retain the domestic sales, rather than splitting them off into a self contained portable line.
I don't think piece-meal is the right word. Expansions that cost $19.99 that include new Monsters and weapons instead of how Evolve tried to do it makes the most sense to me. I think it would fly far better in the west than releasing full-priced G versions every year.
I wouldn't be too sure about that.
From what I understood, though I may be wrong, they're already going down the rabbit hole of DLC cosmetics (?), haven't been keeping track of DLC announcements for World. Ain't a far shot to loot boxes from there.
I'm more interested if they pull the same nefarious bullshit as with MvCI where the characters even show up in the game and were announced as a huge DLC pass before launch for a roster starved release (with popular characters as DLC). This is more of what Capcom has been doing as of late, so this is where I'd keep a careful eye on their plans for DLC. Either day-1 season passes or day-1 DLC announcements for shortly after launch.
This is the crux of the problem of parallel releases. Are you going to start competing with your own GaaS? How does one even make comparable propositions for titles without undermining one with the other?
Night Angel
Member
I doubt anyone expects that for World. But popularizing the series in the West could potentially have it grow beyond its potential market in Japan in subsequent entries. The series seems to have peaked and Capcom might see more growth opportunities in other markets.
Of course, they're going to have to actually market the damn thing.
If this game hits the same WW sales as MH4U, I'd call that a huge success given the massive loss of Japanese sales it will see. Even doubling their Western sales would be great, IMO. Hopefully Capcom has a Switch port in the works so they can capture both audiences.
I hope they do a season pass that releases G rank in stages so we don't have to buy a G game after a year. Cosmetic loot boxes aren't my favorite, but as long as they have no impact on game balance and stats I'd live with it.
Loot boosters would kill my soul.
lyrick
Member
nah, usable items that increase chances of rare loot drops for 30 min / 1 / 2 / 4 / 12 / 24 hours, or increases the possibility of a savage jho like monster of appearing.
How would you feel about a Switch game that is essentially XX 2 in regards to visuals and mechanics? I could see Capcom doing that.
Is for this reason, along with Capcom clearly discarding the Switch at the beginning, that I'm not so sure that a portable MH is really in the cards for any time soon.
What do you mean by XX2? That they'll lock high ranks behind that version?
Sammy Samusu
Member
And Capcom probably makes more money off domestic sales.
Plus, if MHW flops in Japan that's less awareness for the franchise and thus less merchandise sold (toys, clothes, accessories, tickets, etc).
A game with hunting styles and none of the QOL changes of World, with separated zones. Also it looks like an upressed 3DS game.
If they did that, then I think the game would bomb on the NS as well. I think people want the graphical upgrades that they're getting with World and the Monster Hunter portable gameplay.
I don't think that being an option for them.
1. It makes no sense to offer players the same mechanics if they're being pushed forward otherwise. They have that already with Frontier, which has carved out is own niche, but it is still a niche.
2. If Capcom expects to maximize their investment into this generation of the series, reusing those assets is going to be critical in all of their releases going forward until it's necessary to hit the reset button again.
3. If there's a way to entice new players that wouldn't get a console but want something more robust, why wouldn't you keep a Switch version in the same ballpark?
Someone did the analogy before. MH is a lot like a fighting game, the monsters are carefully crafted down to their mechanics, therefore we can't really expect a complete new roster every few years. I'm not so sure if westerns new comers would be very happy of encountering the same monsters on subsequent games.
On one hand, making this the new entry point for the series does allow for them to, over time, re-introduce the monsters of the previous gen and be able to generate content that way, as there are plenty to be able to go through and package it as "new."
On the other hand, that makes the likelihood of the Gravios family and Gypceros returning more likely, which we cannot allow.
Gotdatmoney
Member
Consequently my point also works in reverse. Why exactly does the Switch Monster Hunter need to be exclusive? The Switch has strong enough hardware to be the base of a next gen MH game. What exactly do they gain from this? The only reason it has to be exclusive is it's only releasing in Japan. Why are you spending this large ass budget for Japan only content?
I don't get Capcom.
I don't get Capcom.
Kresnik258
Member
What an odd point to make. "Franchise sells more across 5 entries once it has reached mass-market appeal than across 4 entries during its growth phase".
Well, duh
I think the expectations for 2-3m in the west for MHW are reasonable ...but the fact that all their other titles already underperformed put some extra pressure on the title to perform. Especially since they kinda put their Nintendo benefits/support on hold with MHW...so who knows how the relationship will develop for future releases.
Nintendo can own Japan without Capcom and MH as the Switch is showing....i can see them working with other partners to fill that MH void and i expect announcements early 2018.
For the western market it def. was the right choice to get Mojang, Bethesda, Ubisoft and co. on board early instead of whatever they could get from japanese publishers like Capcom. They would have looked quite bad if they relied on Capcom to deliver xD
Nintendo can own Japan without Capcom and MH as the Switch is showing....i can see them working with other partners to fill that MH void and i expect announcements early 2018.
For the western market it def. was the right choice to get Mojang, Bethesda, Ubisoft and co. on board early instead of whatever they could get from japanese publishers like Capcom. They would have looked quite bad if they relied on Capcom to deliver xD
Laplasakos
Member
I don't have any strategy, i am just speculating what Capcom is thinking.
It's not about what i am expecting, it's about what Capcom expects.
I don't know why Portable 3rd being the best selling third party game excludes it from the discussion...
You completely lost me here.
I doubt Ichinose's team would do what's essentially a 3rd Gen 4 game and his team would be the one on any new Switch title. Likewise X series as a concept is basically "All-Stars" and relies heavily on asset recycling so a Gen 5 X2 isn't really viable either.
I think X is done for now, the Switch game will likely be a Gen 5 adaptation and either end up reviving the Portable branding or else simply shift to being 'Monster Hunter 5' for marketing reasons.
Matrixman.Exe will get mad at me again, but for me is clear that Capcom had no plans for any kind of robust Switch support and MHW, along with the future of the franchise, was designed without any consideration for a possible portable version. If there's indeed a handheld MH in development, it is being scrambled from whatever they can savage from the established pipelines. Either that or its waaaay of.
Well that all depends on many of those resources can actually be shared. Can the bigger, more interactive maps function on Switch? Will Monsters designed for Switch look acceptable on PS4/XBO?
I mean Capcom saw fit to port MHXX HD shortly after it launched but apparently can't do the same for World.
The problem there is they've set the baseline with World. If Switch doesn't hit that baseline then that strategy is already null and void.
For to be actual growth over 3DS, yes it needs to do around that.
SinCityAssassin
Member
Unrelated to this discussion at hand, finally good to see Xbox One outsell the Wii U this week.
Gotdatmoney
Member
It's quite possible no third party game ever sells more than Portable 3 again like ever. Dropping from Portable 3 was inevitable. It's not about excluding, it's about a faux ideal of what MH can reasonably and consistently sell. Anytime someone brings up Portable 3 I roll my eyes. That's like saying when GTA6 sells less than GTA5 the reduction in sales signifies the new platforms are weaker. No, it just means this shit was lightning in a bottles and is never going to be repeated.
I'll make it simple.
Release Monster Hunter World on the Switch in addition to the other platforms and you will sell an additional 2 million units in Japan plus more to the current Western MH fanbase on Switch. Why sell 4 million units when you can sell 6-7?
Release Monster Hunter Switch on PS4/XB1/PC as well and you again, you have the ability to sell whatever you would in Japan + all the extra Western sales.
Why would you develop 2 games that have limited reach in various markets instead of 2 games on all hardware that have total global reach?
Kind of funny how shit planning puts you in a box eh?
ArkhamFantasy
Member
How does it turn into a Monster Hunter thread everytime lol.