all 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't think they truly understand their audience. Everything before the endgame is just a tutorial in MH. Yet, they usually ship the endgame with the DLC .

Then again, it sells anyways.

  • source
  • [–] 50 points 1 year ago

    I don't know why, but I feel like Capcom is just going to offer more DLC instead.

  • source
  • [–] 31 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Why do so many games have such broken, awful, undercooked end-games? It’s endemic.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago* (1 child)

    They think it literally does not matter, and sales kinda reinforce this. The game was an enormous hit on release, but I think it gradually eats away at the faith of the customers as their experience falls to shit in the endgame where the rushed development is glaringly obvious. That's gotta add up and will eventually have an impact cause they sure as shit aren't learning the right lessons. Always remember the best outcome for the top deciders is the quickest biggest buck, and they will throw ANYTHING under the bus that challenges that. Especially thoughtful and rich game design which takes time and love to produce right.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I don't think it eats away the faith. Capcom fixes the performance and endgame before the next release, everyone remembers only the final product. Capcom releases a poorly optimized game with bad endgame. It's a massive hit. Eventually people start complaining. Capcom fixes the game and the cycle continues.

    People could've learned from the launch of World but people remember only the final update and final update World is great.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    It's Capcom, they have no intentions of "fixing it" or "turning it around" because the execs either don't care or no ones told them of the "overwhelmingly negative" reviews on steam. They'll just shut it down like they have previous games. They won't see it as people are not playing it because it's not good they'll just see it as people are not playing it so that must mean it's at it end of life so we should shut it down.

  • source
  • [–] 23 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Compared to World and Rise? It's just not very good. It's by far the fewest hours I've put into a Monster Hunter game since... Well, literally ever.

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Why is this being said so long after release all of a sudden and not sooner?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    I don't play MH, so take my words with a grain of salt, but a friend of mine told me that they were hoping for more frequent and robust title updates to keep the game fresh.

    According to them, there's just not enough end game content for the game to remain interesting in the long run, and that's on top of a gameplay loop far less rewarding/challenging than previous titles.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    i remember when the hundreds of hours of monster hunter came from the content on release. G-rank was the endgame, not $60 dlc that came a year or two later. I always wished monhun would become more mainstream but now i’ve eaten my words.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    G-rank was always a full price DLC that came a year or more later unless you skipped the base games (or Capcom didn't localize them like with 4).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    G-Rank started in Monster Hunter G on PS2. The PS2 was not well known to have paid DLC.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    World was just as bad at launch IMO. There was nothing worth doing post-story until Kulve Taroth came out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I'm famously a World hater, so yes, absolutely. Until Icebourne released, I was extremely disappointed with World, even for a pre-G Rank release.

    Though, all of the titles since Generations have had the problem of being released with a portion of the planned content missing. I was more forgiving of it before, though I am having a hard time pinpointing why.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    It'll never happen, but more people ought to vote with their wallets or else this kind of thing will just keep happening.

  • source
  • [+] -60 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (10 children)

    TLDR: People are review bombing the game for poor performance and lack of endgame content. You can go look at the recent Steam reviews to see this.

    Edit: wow people don't like it pointed out that people are unhappy with the game?

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 130 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    So we're calling legitimate criticism review bombing now?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 75 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (6 children)

    I swear "review bombing" has to be an astroturfed term to delegitimize criticism when companies do shitty things.

    It shifts the blame from the companies doing a shit thing (lacing their game with DRM/anti-cheat malware, making them run like shit unless you enable AI slop upscaling, shoveling AI """art""" assets, MTX, etc.) to the customers that are rightly mad about the shit thing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] -28 points 1 year ago* (5 children)

    The problem is that giving a bad review for performance is kind of (not exactly) like giving bad reviews to something that arrives broken. You never even used the thing how can you give it a 1 if you objectively cannot judge the items on its merits? Likewise you’re not judging the game itself but rather the fact that it does not run well on your hardware. Obviously the developers have responsibility for this, but if you’re a console player or have good hardware the criticism might not sound like a legitimate assessment of the game on its merits.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 32 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    If it runs poorly on the recommended specs, bad reviews are warranted.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -22 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I agree, I’m just saying that the “vibes” of it are like that of giving a 1 star to an item that arrived broken, which is why people will call it review bombing etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago

    If an ordered item arrives broken once, it's a shitty delivery company. 1-star probably isn't warranted unless the company is shitty about replacing it.

    If an ordered item arrives broken regularly, it's a problem that the company should've fixed.

    If a game doesn't work on one person's machine, maybe they've got a bunch of malware installed or something.

    If it doesn't work on many people's machines that meet the recommended specs, the company is at fault and deserves bad reviews.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You never even used the thing how can you give it a 1 if you objectively cannot judge the items on its merits?

    First of all, if you look at the negative reviews, many of them have tens and even hundreds hours of playtime. Secondly, your question doesn't make sense even on its own. Other customers deserve to know that the product they're considering to purchase likely won't work. Quality is a key characteristic of a product.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [+] -21 points 1 year ago
    [+] -126 points 1 year ago (17 children)

    Why do people bother with PC gaming again? Never had a poorly performing game on my Series X. Even Cyberpunk 2077 ran perfectly on launch, I only experienced few minor graphical glitches once in a conversation with an NPC.

    Feels good man.

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 77 points 1 year ago (5 children)
    • Mods
    • fan patches
    • backwards compatibility stretching back ~50 years
    • indie games aren't always on consoles
    • fewer subscription fees
    • hardware can be cheaper over time depending on details
    • games, especially older games, can go on sale for deep discounts
    • piracy
    • can avoid supporting megacorps like Microsoft and Sony

    Just off the top of my head

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] -35 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    But blockbusters always seem to have performance issues.

    I have my series X for those major releases and my ROG Ally for indies. Gaming has never been better for me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 25 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [+] -16 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I’m assuming PC gamers generally understand the required specs. If that is not the case, then that explains why every single AAA release has the same complaint without fail.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    The settings targeted on PC typically far outstrip what consoles can do. I'm targeting modest settings that are still better than what a console can do in those blockbuster games, and it still runs better than on consoles. They just don't scale as well as they should when you continue to crank the settings up.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 35 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Even Cyberpunk 2077 ran perfectly on launch,

    Liar.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago

    Seriously... I've never had any other game crash on PS5 so much that it stopped popping up to ask if I wanted to send a crash report. It was still fun and I couldn't stop playing it, but it crashed every half hour.

    I don't believe for a second that it was magically perfect on Xbox.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    It more or less did on the Series X. A lot of the clips people posted showing the really bad performance and bugs were from the original 2014 Xbox One or the Series S. On the Series X, it performed very well and I think I had it crash only twice in a 70 hour playthrough, in my own experience playing 2077 on my own Series X.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -19 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    On the Series X? Absolutely it did. I had some glitches with objects floating in cutscenes and that one cyber implant that didn’t work. Put 90 hours in.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] 18 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [+] -9 points 1 year ago

    I don’t usually expect absolutely no glitches on my open world games so for me that’s basically perfect. I did grow up playing hundreds of hours into an unpatched Xbox 360 version of oblivion so maybe I have more tolerance than most to minor shit like that. It didn’t even affect gameplay, it was just floating objects

  • source
  • parent