Support NeoGAF

[AdventureRacing]

I don't know segata but i am extremely confident that his leaving was not the result of that one big argument. Also it wasn't a sony fan because the discussion was about DKC (and segata was spot on and i was arguing alongside him but some people don't take kindly to criticisms of games).

 

[AceBandage]

I miss Segata.

 

[test_account]

Let's go back to sales. Concerning Vita, are we seeing a new variation of an old bullshit (PS3 times)?

"Wait until the rumored Monster Hunter game..."

Personally i havnt seen anyone who have used the "wait for" reason regarding MH. What has been discussed is that Vita might get a MH game.

Your most likely going to see a similar situation of the first 6-7 months of what happend with the 3DS regarding discussions and talk.

 

[oldie-newbie]

Personally i havnt seen anyone who have used the "wait for" reason regarding MH. What has been discussed is that Vita might get a MH game.

Your most likely going to see a similar situation of the first 6-7 months of what happend with the 3DS regarding discussions and talk.

Yes I agree but a lot of posts for the rumored Vita Monster Hunter game. So, let's talk about announced games for Vita and 3DS and how hardware sales can change...

 

[Sammy Samusu]

02./04. [3DS] Monster Hunter 3G # <ACT> (Capcom) {2011.12.10} (¥5.800) - 100.042 / 985.498 (-35%)
26./34. [PSP] Monster Hunter Freedom 3 (PSP the Best) <ACT> (Capcom) {2011.09.22} (¥2.990)

Dis gon b gud in February.

I expect MH3G to sell 70k this week, and 35k next week.

 

[Mpl90]

02./04. [3DS] Monster Hunter 3G # <ACT> (Capcom) {2011.12.10} (¥5.800) - 100.042 /
26./34. [PSP] Monster Hunter Freedom 3 (PSP the Best) <ACT> (Capcom) {2011.09.22} (¥2.990)

Dis gon b gud in February.

I expect MH3G to sell 100k this week, and 50k next week.

Fixed.

 

[ULTROS!]

I dunno but the past few MC threads felt more Nintendo-Age than Sales-Age to me.

 

[Datschge]

Okay, I'm leaving these threads now

 

[Sammy Samusu]

Fixed.

BOOKMARKED FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

 

[Lord_Byron28]

I dunno but the past few MC threads felt more Nintendo-Age than Sales-Age to me.

Same can be said when 3DS was bombing. Also, it happens with any major numbers(positive of negative). Obviously bias does occur. Only reason why you seem to think it feels that way is because the 3DS pulled extremely good numbers and Vita did the opposite. If it was the Vita pulling extremely good numbers and 3DS doing the opposite the thread would likely be just as busy but with people congratulating Vita and dooming the 3DS.

 

[ULTROS!]

Same can be said when 3DS was bombing. Also, it happens with any major numbers(positive of negative). Obviously bias does occur. Only reason why you seem to think it feels that way is because the 3DS pulled extremely good numbers and Vita did the opposite. If it was the Vita pulling extremely good numbers and 3DS doing the opposite the thread would likely be just as busy but with people congratulating Vita and dooming the 3DS.

I wish a Microsoft-Age would happen at least soon or any time in the future.

 

[AceBandage]

I wish a Microsoft-Age would happen at least soon or any time in the future.

In a Japanese Sales Age thread?
That would be glorious...

 

[Erethian]

Fixed.

MH3G might sell more in week 01 than it did in week 52, depends what its legs are like.

 

[TyRaNtM]

Is there a report of how sold in Week 1, 2012 all hardware and software?

 

[Alrus]

^It'll come on wednesday as usual.

MH3G might sell more in week 01 than it did in week 52, depends what its legs are like.

I don't really see it happening tbh.

 

[AceBandage]

^It'll come on wednesday as usual.



I don't really see it happening tbh.

Well, traditionally, there is a rise in products for the week that includes January the 2nd because of Holiday Money in Japan.
But who knows.

 

[TyRaNtM]

^It'll come on wednesday as usual.



I don't really see it happening tbh.

I'm talking about an early report, like "X console is selling a lot in X retail store, etc..", not the MC report.

 

[oldie-newbie]

I don't really see it happening tbh.

Depending on how much money japanese teenagers received for the new year but the probability that sales for 3DS Monster Hunter be around this week numbers seems reasonable to me...

 

[Erethian]

Depending on how much money japanese teenagers received for the new year but the probability that sales for 3DS Monster Hunter be around this week numbers seems reasonable to me...

Thinking about it more made me go back and see the sales for PSP MH games that were released in or close to December, and where January 2nd fell within week 01.

The only MH game that fits within that is the first MHP, and it saw a marginal rise from week 52 to week 01. It was a very leggy game, though.

 

[Dalthien]

It's not like there's a "Portable" series that's a distinct, separate thing from just being remixed series entries on a portable system. If they were going to do a Vita game, it wouldn't have Portable in the title (since, y'know, the system doesn't either) and it wouldn't have the same relationship to the 3DS titles that the PS2 and PSP titles had to one another.

It's certainly not plausible at all that Nintendo paid for the series but got a meaningless deal where just sticking the word "Portable" behind the title would let Capcom release it on their competitor system. If Nintendo arranged an exclusivity deal here, it's not going to have that kind of loophole.

I guess I'm one of the few who doesn't believe that some massive bag of moneyhats was involved in bringing MH to 3DS. I think Capcom was already leaning to the 3DS, and Nintendo just sweetened the offer enough (publishing/marketing arrangements, frankenstick, etc.) to finalize the decision.

There are numerous reasons why such a move makes sense.

- for one, Sony was late to the party with Vita. Giving 3DS a year-long start made it a more appealing platform right off the bat for a company looking to make the move to the next gen. It gave them the chance to start moving the fanbase right at the start of the generation. And the fact that 3DS already has a 4 million (and growing) userbase advantage before Vita even launches.

- then there's the similarity of the hardware to previous PS2/Wii/PSP iterations. 3DS keeps dev costs down compared to moving the series to Vita

- and then there's the fact that Capcom wants to establish a real foothold on 3DS from day 1. They completely missed the boat on the DS last gen. The biggest system ever released in Japan, and Capcom was nowhere to be found. They never established a presence. Square Enix, Namco-Bandai, Sega, Level 5 - they all had million sellers on DS. Capcom never even came close. They missed the party, and I had a feeling before this gen started that Capcom would make a real effort to be there in a big way on 3DS from the get-go. At this point, I don't think anyone can argue that their 3DS support has been a world apart from their DS support (especially during the 1st year of each platform).


All that aside, I just don't understand the appeal of running two separate and distinct MH franchises on two separate portable platforms (which seems to be a popular idea on these boards). I mean, I get the appeal of having two franchises to make money instead of one, but even if Capcom has the development resources and imagination to co-develop two different franchises in unison - I still don't understand why they wouldn't just put them both on 3DS at this point. They've already begun the migration of the fanbase (which will only intensify further with the release of MH4). So if the fanbase is on 3DS, what's the reasoning for putting the 2nd series on a different portable platform? Especially a platform which might struggle to reach a userbase of 2 million by the end of 2012. At this point, the most reasonable thing to do (if they are actually hellbent on running two different portable MH series at the same time) is just put them both with the same userbase.

The reason it made sense having two different series running together before was because they targeted different experiences. One series was for play at home on a TV, the other was for portable play. Two different platforms made sense for the two different experiences. That reasoning doesn't really work any longer if both series are for portable play.

Something like a port of MHP3HD to Vita makes sense because the game is already finished, so it is a simple enough port. But even then, with the game already available on PSN, I'm not sure if there is really a point for such a project in Japan.

 

[charlequin]

I guess I'm one of the few who doesn't believe that some massive bag of moneyhats was involved in bringing MH to 3DS.

No, I've argued basically the same case here and in the Vita rumor thread, for similar reasons (establish a single foothold early, pick the system with lower development costs, etc.)

All that aside, I just don't understand the appeal of running two separate and distinct MH franchises on two separate portable platforms (which seems to be a popular idea on these boards).

There isn't one.

 

[Dash Kappei]

I've spoken to cvxfreak about it. Its a decision that he has made this time for personal reasons. He's not leaving NeoGAF, he's just not going to post (much?) on Media Create threads anymore. I respect his reasons, and it's probably for the best.

Fair enough

 

[donny2112]

I suppose if anyone really really cared about enabling Famitsu's craziness they could supply a new list of dates like "famitsu2011end" to be added.

Tracking weeks from the beginning date makes that a problem, but tracking dates from the end of the week (i.e. date where the totals are through) makes Famitsu much easier than crazy MC.

cvxfreak,

I hope you'll still pop in from time to time for Sales Age/MC threads. It's good to hear a well-informed opinion, whether I agree with it or not. It at least gets me thinking about stuff I might've missed before. You've definitely been a consistently great poster over the years.

I wish a Microsoft-Age would happen at least soon or any time in the future.

I remember jimbo, too.

 

[Grimmy]

I guess I'm one of the few who doesn't believe that some massive bag of moneyhats was involved in bringing MH to 3DS. I think Capcom was already leaning to the 3DS, and Nintendo just sweetened the offer enough (publishing/marketing arrangements, frankenstick, etc.) to finalize the decision.

I'm pretty sure Capcom always planned to make MH games on the 3DS - that required no "moneyhats". But, as discussed in the previous page, the sudden nixing of the MHP3 announcement for Vita at TGS last year indicates that something major must have happened - and at the very last minute. And somehow I don't think it's just "sweetening the offer" that made Capcom do such a last-minute reversal.

 

[watershed]

I'm pretty sure Capcom always planned to make MH games on the 3DS - that required no "moneyhats". But, as discussed in the previous page, the sudden nixing of the MHP3 announcement for Vita at TGS last year indicates that something major must have happened - and at the very last minute. And somehow I don't think it's just "sweetening the offer" that made Capcom do such a last-minute reversal.

Also the announcement and trailer of MH4 at the end of Nintendo's fall conference. I don't think anyone saw that coming.

 

[Dalthien]

I'm pretty sure Capcom always planned to make MH games on the 3DS - that required no "moneyhats". But, as discussed in the previous page, the sudden nixing of the MHP3 announcement for Vita at TGS last year indicates that something major must have happened - and at the very last minute. And somehow I don't think it's just "sweetening the offer" that made Capcom do such a last-minute reversal.

If we follow your thoughts, then whatever caused the reversal (if there even was a reversal - that's still just speculation), it certainly wasn't Nintendo moneyhats. If MH was already coming to 3DS anyway, then there's no way Nintendo would pay big money just to keep it off Vita. The same game (sans the HD) is already available to all Vita owners via PSN anyway.

Maybe they decided it just wasn't worthwhile putting together a retail package for a game that is already available on PSN. Maybe it (the reversal) was included as part of the publishing/marketing agreement with Nintendo. Maybe it was only ever planned for a western release since it is already available on PSN for Japan. Maybe they decided to delay the announcement and release in order to avoid diluting the migration of the fanbase to 3DS. Or maybe it was never going to be announced at TGS in the first place.

But regardless, if Monster Hunter was already coming to the 3DS anyway, then Nintendo certainly didn't pay big money for the sole privilege of keeping if off Vita.

 

[Grimmy]

If we follow your thoughts, then whatever caused the reversal (if there even was a reversal - that's still just speculation), it certainly wasn't Nintendo moneyhats. If MH was already coming to 3DS anyway, then there's no way Nintendo would pay big money just to keep it off Vita. The same game (sans the HD) is already available to all Vita owners via PSN anyway.

Maybe they decided it just wasn't worthwhile putting together a retail package for a game that is already available on PSN. Maybe it (the reversal) was included as part of the publishing/marketing agreement with Nintendo. Maybe it was only ever planned for a western release since it is already available on PSN for Japan. Or maybe it was never going to be announced at TGS in the first place.

But regardless, if Monster Hunter was already coming to the 3DS anyway, then Nintendo certainly didn't pay big money for the sole privilege of keeping if off Vita.

Why is there "no way" Nintendo would pay big money to keep MH off the Vita just because it's coming already on the 3DS? Getting MH as an exclusive is the biggest coup Nintendo could have, especially since Nintendo knows it's the only thing Sony's PSP/Vita has that is a real system seller. By making MH exclusive (or at least a timed exclusive - very important since it's the perception that MH isn't coming to Vita that is really blunting Vita's launch), Nintendo basically neutered its competitor, especially since Sony has no other real system seller on the Vita now.

To me, keeping any kind of MH announcement off the Vita for as long as possible is the smartest thing Nintendo could have done.

Why do people have such a negative connotation of moneyhatting anyways? To me, if Nintendo DID moneyhat Capcom, it's one of the smartest things they did. I'd applaud them.

 

[Dalthien]

Why is there "no way" Nintendo would pay big money to keep MH off the Vita just because it's coming already on the 3DS? Getting MH as an exclusive is the biggest coup Nintendo could have, especially since Nintendo knows it's the only thing Sony's PSP/Vita has that is a real system seller. By making MH exclusive (or at least a timed exclusive - very important since it's the perception that MH isn't coming to Vita that is really blunting Vita's launch), Nintendo basically neutered its competitor, especially since Sony has no other real system seller on the Vita now.

Seriously? We're talking about the MHP3HD announcement?

It's one thing to pay to bring a game to your system (which isn't Nintendo's M.O. anyway - they prefer publishing arrangements, development partnerships, marketing deals, lending out mascots for use in-game, licensing discounts - not flat-out moneyhats), but paying big money to keep a game off a competitor's system, when you are already getting the 2 newest games to come in that franchise, and that game that you are paying to nuke is already available on that competitor's system anyway? Come on now - you're really not arguing this, are you? There's nothing stopping Sony from advertising right now about how you can buy MHP3 on Vita.

That would be like the worst moneyhat ever. "Here's a big bag of money so you won't release a game that you've already released."

 

[Lonely1]

I've spoken to cvxfreak about it. Its a decision that he has made this time for personal reasons. He's not leaving NeoGAF, he's just not going to post (much?) on Media Create threads anymore. I respect his reasons, and it's probably for the best.

Can you bring Segata back? he was a fun dude.

 

[Grimmy]

Seriously? We're talking about the MH3PHD announcement?

It's one thing to pay to bring a game to your system (which isn't Nintendo's M.O. anyway - they prefer publishing arrangements, development partnerships, marketing deals, lending out mascots for use in-game, licensing discounts - not flat-out moneyhats), but paying big money to keep a game off a competitor's system, when you are already getting the 2 newest games to come in that franchise, and that game that you are paying to nuke is already available on that competitor's system anyway? Come on now - you're really not arguing this, are you?

As if dropping the price of your brand new system by $80 is Nintendo's M.O. Nintendo was obviously in a desperate situation, and they wanted to make damn sure that they can blunt the Vita's launch as much as possible. Of course, Nintendo must have also convinced Capcom that they will publish and market MH3G/MH4 overseas, which is a great idea considering how much better Tri did in the West. But if you really think no kinds of transaction went on then I really think you're being naive. Nintendo may have promised to pay all localization, publishing and marketing costs for all MH in the West in the future - that is also a monetary deal. To me that's the same as moneyhatting, since all of that is quite a lot of costs.

And if you really think that not having any MH on the Vita isn't a psychological blow for potential customers, then I think you're being way too naive. Yes, Nintendo already has MH3G and MH4, but people were still expecting an MH on the Vita, especially since MH4 was not announced as an exclusive. So during this past holiday season fans may have bought a Vita instead of the 3DS+frankenstick in anticipation of a new MH. However, with the lack of MH announcements on the Vita, period, MH fans basically had no choice.

 

[LOCK]

...Err, unfortunately i just posted Comgnet rankings XD
But they're useful, especially if taken just once in a week, when there's also the actual sales chart for them.
...But I can understand the Amazon complaint, and maybe it's better to just not post the Amazon Watch anymore. I'll accept at least this part of what you said

Amazon is just as anecdotal as anything else, so post those if you want. They do show biased trends which some information can be garnered from. It would be totally different if you took these sources as direct evidence of sales, but you don't and you try your best to make some sort of sales correlation. Don't stop posting information that you feel is worth talking about. I think your sales-spirit lightens up these threads.

 

[Dalthien]

As if dropping the price of your brand new system by $80 is Nintendo's M.O. Nintendo was obviously in a desperate situation, and they wanted to make damn sure that they can blunt the Vita's launch as much as possible. Of course, Nintendo must have also convinced Capcom that they will publish and market MH3G/MH4 overseas, which is a great idea considering how much better Tri did in the West. But if you really think no kinds of transaction went on then I really think you're being naive. Nintendo may have promised to pay all localization, publishing and marketing costs for all MH in the West in the future - that is also a monetary deal. To me that's the same as moneyhatting, since all of that is quite a lot of costs.

And if you really think that not having any MH on the Vita isn't a psychological blow for potential customers, then I think you're being way too naive. Yes, Nintendo already has MH3G and MH4, but people were still expecting an MH on the Vita, especially since MH4 was not announced as an exclusive. So during this past holiday season fans may have bought a Vita instead of the 3DS+frankenstick in anticipation of a new MH. However, with the lack of MH announcements on the Vita, period, MH fans basically had no choice.

Now you're just changing your own story. Your first post specifically referred to the nixing of MHP3 for the Vita at TGS. Why in heaven would Nintendo pay to nix a game that is ALREADY AVAILABLE on Vita? The exact same game. Everyone can go buy it on their Vita right now. Capcom can advertise for it right now. Sony can advertise for it right now. I would sure as hell want my money back if that's what I paid for.

But now you're changing it from nixing MHP3 at TGS to somehow Nintendo bought exclusivity of the entire Monster Hunter franchise and all conceivable spinoffs.

And in my very first post I said how Nintendo sweetened the deal with publishing/marketing agreements, frankenstick, etc, in order to finalize the MH3G/MH4 deal. And then you responded back by saying that it took more than just "sweetening the offer" to get Capcom to nix the TGS announcement. So don't try to fall back now that marketing/publishing/localizaion counts as moneyhats. I already conceded that from the start, and you already clarified that you thought it went beyond those kinds of deals.

Don't stop posting information that you feel is worth talking about. I think your sales-spirit lightens up these threads.

There's really nothing different between the comgnet reports and Vinnk's reports. Vinnk goes out and collects some sales info from retailers around town, and comgnet is a collection of sales info from a different Japanese retailer. And I certainly don't want to forbid Vinnk's Village (love it!), so there's no reason at all not to continue with the comgnet reports as well.

 

[Grimmy]

Now you're just changing your own story. Your first post specifically referred to the nixing of MHP3 for the Vita at TGS. Why in heaven would Nintendo pay to nix a game that is ALREADY AVAILABLE on Vita. The exact same game. Everyone can go buy it on their Vita right now. Capcom can advertise for it right now. Sony can advertise for it right now. I would sure as hell want my money back if that's what I paid for.

But now you're changing it from nixing MHP3 at TGS to somehow Nintendo bought exclusivity of the entire Monster Hunter franchise and all conceivable spinoffs.

And in my very first post I said how Nintendo sweetened the deal with publishing/marketing agreements, frankenstick, etc. And then you responded back by saying that it took more than just "sweetening the offer" to get Capcom to nix the TGS announcement. So don't try to fall back now that marketing/publishing/localizaion counts as moneyhats. I already conceded that from the start, and you already clarified that you thought it went beyond those kinds of deals.

1. I mentioned the "deals" in regards to MH3G and MH4, NOT the last-minute nixing of MH for Vita. Those are two different things. My argument has always been about Capcom's last-minute reneging on the Vita announcement being more than just the standard deal.

2. I never said this either: "But now you're changing it from nixing MHP3 at TGS to somehow Nintendo bought exclusivity of the entire Monster Hunter franchise and all conceivable spinoffs." What? I said it might be a timed exclusive. Without knowing the deal there's no way I can ever be that certain what kind of deal it might be - I'm not daft.

3. "Now you're just changing your own story. Your first post specifically referred to the nixing of MHP3 for the Vita at TGS. Why in heaven would Nintendo pay to nix a game that is ALREADY AVAILABLE on Vita."

Sigh. I just addressed that in my last post. I'll repost it again:

"And if you really think that not having any MH on the Vita isn't a psychological blow for potential customers, then I think you're being way too naive. Yes, Nintendo already has MH3G and MH4, but people were still expecting an MH on the Vita, especially since MH4 was not announced as an exclusive. So during this past holiday season fans may have bought a Vita instead of the 3DS+frankenstick in anticipation of a new MH. However, with the lack of MH announcements on the Vita, period, MH fans basically had no choice."

OK, maybe I should reword it as:

"And if you really think that not APPEARING TO HAVE any MH on the Vita isn't a psychological blow for potential customers, then I think you're being way too naive. Yes, Nintendo already has MH3G and MH4, but people were still expecting an MH on the Vita, especially since MH4 was not announced as an exclusive. So during this past holiday season fans may have bought a Vita instead of the 3DS+frankenstick in anticipation of a new MH. However, with the lack of MH announcements on the Vita, period, MH fans basically had no choice."

Does that make it clearer? The appearance of a total exclusive (ie. no MH Vita announcement) is crucial for Nintendo in its ability to blunt the Vita launch this past x'mas, as well as help Nintendo have its biggest month ever (though admittedly it was already helped my MK7, Mario, etc).

If MHP3 was announced on the Vita, there's a good chance people will think that a sequel is imminent. Without any kinds of announcements, people now believe Nintendo has full exclusivity. That is a big thing.

 

[AdventureRacing]

How much money do you think nintendo would have to give capcom to get MH exclusively on the 3DS? MH is nearly the biggest brand in Japan and they won't risk ruining that for a small amount of money.

I think pretty much everyone can agree that nintendo did something to sweeten the deal. However i think that MH was most likely heading to the 3DS anyway.

If capcom thought it would be good for the brand to be on the vita i doubt any sort of money hat would stop them from putting it there.

 

[Dalthien]

If MHP3 was announced on the Vita, there's a good chance people will think that a sequel is imminent. Without any kinds of announcements, people now believe Nintendo has full exclusivity. That is a big thing.

But MHP3 is already on Vita. You can buy it right now. It's been available since Vita launched. You seem to keep missing this point.

 

[Grimmy]

But MHP3 is already on Vita. You can buy it right now. You seem to keep missing this point.

And you keep on missing MY point. The key is for Nintendo to keep MH off the Vita for as long as possible - regardless of whichever version it was. And plus, how do you know it's the exact same version as the PSP one? Since it was never announced, we know next to nothing about the MHP3 version on the Vita.

 

[Dalthien]

And you keep on missing MY point. The key is for Nintendo to keep MH off the Vita for as long as possible - regardless of whichever version it was. And plus, how do you know it's the exact same version as the PSP one? Since it was never announced, we know next to nothing about the MHP3 version on the Vita.

We don't even know that there was ever any announcement for Vita planned at all. You specifically listed MHP3 by name for TGS, and the rumour about TGS was for MHP3HD (which has already been released for PS3, and was nothing more than a mediocre up-res version of the exact same MHP3 game). If we're not even sticking to the rumour anymore, then we can just imagine any old thing that pops into our head, and this whole discussion becomes pretty pointless.

Edit - and Nintendo hasn't kept MH off of Vita. Not even for one day. It's available on Vita RIGHT NOW for anyone to go buy. Sony could advertise the living daylights out of it right now if they thought having any old MH on Vita really mattered. They could even have made it a big part of their TGS show if it was that important. Whatever happened between Capcom and Nintendo wouldn't have affected that one bit.

 

[Grimmy]

We don't even know that there was ever any announcement for Vita planned at all. You specifically listed MHP3 by name for TGS, and the rumour about TGS was for MHP3HD (which has already been released for PS3, and was nothing more than a mediocre up-res version of the exact same MHP3 game). If we're not even sticking to the rumour anymore, then we can just imagine any old thing that pops into our head, and this whole discussion becomes pretty pointless.

Edit - and Nintendo hasn't kept MH off of Vita. Not even for one day. It's available on Vita RIGHT NOW for anyone to go buy. Sony could advertise the living daylights out of it right now if they thought it really mattered.

OK, you seem to keep missing my point - the point here is to keep Capcom from announcing a MH Vita game, which was supposedly going to happen in TGS. Why you are talking about MHP3rd which isn't even supported by the UMD passport program - I have no idea. You keep arguing about the semantics of what the Vita game is (which we don't know and I don't particularly care since I'm talking about branding and its psychological effect) rather than a possible justification of why Nintendo WOULD moneyhat MH to not be announced for the Vita at last year's TGS.

As you said, it's all conjectures anyways, so we can keep wasting hours arguing about things that may or may not have happened. And since you don't care to argue my point, nothing else can be said.

 

[Dalthien]

OK, you seem to keep missing my point - the point here is to keep Capcom from announcing a MH Vita game

Which Capcom or Sony could have always announced from Day 1 anyway with MHP3. And MHP3HD is the same game - Nintendo wouldn't pay money just to keep an MHP3HD announcement from happening - that announcement would have been laughed at and dwarfed massively by the MH3G and MH4 announcements at that exact same TGS show.

Why you are talking about MHP3rd

Hmm...what was your first post that started all this again?

But, as discussed in the previous page, the sudden nixing of the MHP3 announcement for Vita at TGS

Wonder why I'm talking about MHP3 (or MHP3HD)...

And since you don't care to argue my point, nothing else can be said.

Except that I've repeated myself ad nauseum now arguing your point. Nothing was stopping Capcom or Sony from championing and highlighting MHP3 on Vita at TGS. And MHP3HD would have been so far overshadowed by the MH3G and MH4 announcements that it still wouldn't have changed much. Certainly wouldn't have been worth Nintendo spending a small fortune, when the non-ported version of the game is already fully playable on Vita.

Anyway, yeah - nothing much else to say. I can't possibly imagine Nintendo spending money just to nix a TGS announcement of MHP3HD. And there's no way in hell Nintendo forked over enough money to buy exclusivity (timed or otherwise) for the entire Monster Hunter franchise and any conceivable spin-offs, ports, remakes, prequels, or what have you.

 

[Kenka]

We must now find an adequate gif for this conversation between Dalthien and Grimmy. Keep going on guys, it smells like the beginning of epic stuff !

How much money do you think nintendo would have to give capcom to get MH exclusively on the 3DS? MH is nearly the biggest brand in Japan and they won't risk ruining that for a small amount of money.

I think pretty much everyone can agree that nintendo did something to sweeten the deal. However i think that MH was most likely heading to the 3DS anyway.

We don't know if Nintendo got an exclusivity deal at all. MH is the biggest brand in JP after Mario and Pokémon, moneying it can cost you an arm and a leg to say the least. You can compare its selling power to the Halo franchise in absolute terms.

Imagine how much money Nintendo would have given to have Master Chief exclusively on Wii and you get the scale.

 

[bigtroyjon]

We don't know if Nintendo got an exclusivity deal at all. MH is the biggest brand in JP after Mario and Pokémon, moneying it can cost you an arm and a leg to say the least. You can compare its selling power to the Halo franchise in absolute terms.

Imagine how much money Nintendo would have given to have Master Chief exclusively on Wii and you get the scale.

uhhh, I'm not sure if serious.

 

[Kenka]

uhhh, I'm not sure if serious.

I am. It's just an example to give an idea of what the moneyhat would look like. Alright, Halo's example is maybe a tad exaggerated (but not much).

 

[AdventureRacing]

We don't know if Nintendo got an exclusivity deal at all. MH is the biggest brand in JP after Mario and Pokémon, moneying it can cost you an arm and a leg to say the least. You can compare its selling power to the Halo franchise in absolute terms.

Imagine how much money Nintendo would have given to have Master Chief exclusively on Wii and you get the scale.

That's exactly what i said in my post.

 

[cw_sasuke]

We don't know if Nintendo got an exclusivity deal at all. MH is the biggest brand in JP after Mario and Pokémon, moneying it can cost you an arm and a leg to say the least. You can compare its selling power to the Halo franchise in absolute terms.

Imagine how much money Nintendo would have given to have Master Chief exclusively on Wii and you get the scale.

The point which many of your are missing - the 3DS is and will probably being the hardware with the most userbase and is already way ahead of the Vita in term of userbase. Its not like Nintendo has to convince Capcom to bring MH to a system with a smaller userbase, higher dev costs etc.

Which is probably the situation Sony was in. So for Nintendo to sweetin the Deal for Capcom was probably waaay more affordable and reasonable than for Sony to keep MH off Nintendo System. Its the same way with the Ps2 back in the, yes Publishers could have released many titles also on Cube/Xbox but with Sony market position they didnt need much effort to secure exclusives even if they could have made a lil bit of money by porting it to other systems.

Its not exactly the same, but people are still acting as if Capcom decided to put MH on a system which is about to fail and being outsold 10:1 by its competition, thats not the case at all - with all the first and 3rd party support the 3DS had even before its launch it and the DS dominance the years before that it seemed like the natural fit for most big 3rd Party IPs.

 

[Kenka]

The point which many of your are missing - the 3DS is and will probably being the hardware with the most userbase and is already way ahead of the Vita in term of userbase. Its not like Nintendo has to convince Capcom to bring MH to a system with a smaller userbase, higher dev costs etc.

Which is probably the situation Sony was in. So for Nintendo to sweetin the Deal for Capcom was probably waaay more affordable and reasonable than for Sony to keep MH off Nintendo System. Its the same way with the Ps2 back in the, yes Publishers could have released many titles also on Cube/Xbox but with Sony market position they didnt need much effort to secure exclusives even if they could have made a lil bit of money by porting it to other systems.

Good parallel with the past but you slightly missed our point (lol). We are talking "exclusivity", not about the simple fact of releasing a game for a platform. Had Nintendo signed an exclusivity deal, it would have cost them mucho bucks. But I do agree with you in the sense that it would have cost Sony a lot more to keep the franchise off the 3DS.

 

[cw_sasuke]

Good parallel with the past but you slightly missed our point (lol). We are talking "exclusivity", not about the simple fact of releasing a game for a platform. Had Nintendo signed an exclusivity deal, it would have cost them mucho bucks. But I do agree with you in the sense that it would have cost Sony a lot more to keep the franchise off the 3DS.

Thats what im saying - MH way already planned for MH and pushing Capcom for an exclusive road probably wasnt THAT hard as some people imagine. After all the series had it most success as exclusive titles on a single handheld platform - why change something which clearly works. All the biggest IPs - Pokemon and DQ are able to sell a shitload without goin multi, especially on Handhelds....why would it be different for MH. With Nintendo publishing/marketing and distribute(europe) most if not all of Capcoms 3DS title the deal was sealed. They highlighted the title in Japan, probably paid for the advertising, offered a bundle etc.

 

[bigtroyjon]

I am. It's just an example to give an idea of what the moneyhat would look like. Alright, Halo's example is maybe a tad exaggerated (but not much).

Still not sure but if you are serious you're either underestimating Halo or overestimating MH. Halo sells far more units(even without having yearly installments) and sells each unit at a much higher price.

MH series had shipped 19 million at the end of September. Halo 3 by itself has done more than half of that.

 

[cw_sasuke]

Halo is first party i don`t even know why you would bring it up.

 

[manueldelalas]

About the MHP3 port to VITA rumor.

That rumor wasn't wrong at all, the thing is that the insider with the rumor wasn't someone that made high decisions, it was probably someone who had access to early footage of what was actually shown, and in the video, there was MHP3.

The thing is that the guy didn't realize that it wasn't a port, but it was an example of PSP games played on VITA.

This point (the one that the guy had access to early footage) is proven by the fact that he mentioned 4 warriors of light 2; which is another rumor that proved to be fake, but if you had access to video footage, and you saw, and only saw, the footage of Bravely Default, you would immediately think of 4 Warriors of Light. Also, if someone was inventing rumors, I think 4 Warriors of Light 2 is hardly a "credible" rumor at all, so there go my two cents about that.

This should explain the MH VITA rumor, and also give some hope to the Bayonetta fans.

 

[Road]

2nd week for some Vita games.

Famitsu, week 52, 2011-12-19~2011-12-25:

[PSV] Hot Shots Golf: World Invitational (SCE) {2011-12-17} - ~17,000 / 69,000
[PSV] Uncharted: Golden Abyss (SCE) {2011-12-17} - ~15,000 / 58,000
[PSV] Dynasty Warriors Next (Koei Tecmo) {2011-12-17} - ~13,000 / 45,000
[PSV] Lord of Apocalypse (Square Enix) {2011-12-17} - ~11,000 / 40,000

http://mantan-web.jp/2012/01/09/20120107dog00m200038000c.html