Monster Hunter World
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-06-2017, 03:58 AM (This post was last modified: 29-06-2017 04:04 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Monster Hunter World
(29-06-2017 03:18 AM)JesseB Wrote:  
(29-06-2017 01:27 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  But aw man, the amount of fucking salt coming from dipshits on the Monster Hunter Reddit who seriously think the Switch is both capable and deserving a port of World is fucking hilarious. It would be even funnier, if it wasn't so sad.

>.> Don't forget there was once people that said 480i was better than 1080p or made claims they couldn't see the difference.... (but then again 1080p advertised on 480i TV's made about as much sense as trying to swim carrying an anchor). Just saying that particular brand of stupid has been around a long time.


Yeah, I know, it's just frustrating. I mean, I went to school for this shit. That doesn't make me infallible by any means, but given how much I keep up on this stuff, I'd consider myself to have an informed opinion on the matter.

I love the Switch, and would love to see a version of World on it, if I seriously thought the hardware was capable of such without making severe sacrifices.

The Switch is, at it's heart, a glorified smartphone. Not even that glorified, as flagship smart phones have been outperforming the Switch's capabilities for years; the device has launched well behind the technology curve. The system is a modified SOC (system on chip) nVidia Tegra X1, which contain a quad core ARM Cortex A57. Compare that to the X86 based 8-core AMD Jaguar CPU's found in the PS4 and Xbox One, and there's a huge disparity in computational horsepower. Plus, the difference between ARM and X86 is important to consider.







The developers themselves, when asked why this game is coming to new home consoles and PC and hasn't been announced for the Switch, flat out said that it was because the newer consoles had the power to do the things they always had wanted to but never had enough power to do before. The Switch is on par with the Xbox 360 and PS3, and if they had enough power to do what they wanted to in World, they'd simply have already done it.

The game is moving from a series of distinct and interconnected battle arenas, to a single contiguous map, which itself comes in at more than twice the size of the older layouts. The game is going full Western RPG by now incorporating design ideas from the Immersive Sim sub-genre (Deus Ex, Thief, Dishonored, Fallout), in having a large clock-work world with a bunch of overlapping elements that can interact with one another to create emergent gameplay. There are many monsters in each area, all running far more complex AI routine, that enable them to better interact with the environment, the hunters, and other monsters. The hunters themselves are far more mobile than ever before, displaying a level of terrain traversal heretofore unseen in the series. Many of the game's staple mechanics are now built into the environment, with plants and smaller animals acting as triggers for everything from smoke bombs, paintballs (for tracking in previous titles), shock traps, and poison bombs. The environment itself can be destroyed in ways that fundamentally alter the map, such as destroying a wall and unleashing a makeshift waterfall to wash away the Rathalos off the edge of a cliff.

Now technically, they could get World running on the Switch. It would probably look like hell and run just as bad, but for the sake of argument it could technically be done (assuming they can get their engine running on the ARM instruction set). But that won't stop the delusional from being convinced that an announcement for the Switch version, looking comparable to what has already been shown, is just around the corner.

That's preposterous.

Besides everything I've already outlined above, there are two other important facts to consider. The Switch is already getting a Monster Hunter title, a port of Monster Hunter: Double Cross (MHXX). This title is an upscale version of the same game already available on the 3DS in Japan (yes, the 3DS is ARM based, so it's a rather straightforward port). So this game has set a precedent not only for player expectation of what a MH game will look like on the platform, but of what Capcom is capable of doing on the system. This higher resolution version of a 3DS game runs at 30 frames per second. What we've seen of World so far also has that game running at a very smooth 30 frames per second, and as already shown, on demonstrably more powerful hardware.

If the teams at Capcom were capable of the coding and technical wizardry needed to get the Switch to run a version of World in anything close to what has been shown, and do so at 30 frames per second? They'd be more than capable of getting the Switch version of MHXX to run at a rock solid 60 frames per second, and likewise they should be capable of 60 frames per second on the PS4 and Xbox One. Which would be great, I'd love it if their tech was that streamlined and their programmers were really that good; those would be markedly improved experiences for both of those games after all. But they aren't making 60 FPS, either with their flagship title on the more powerful home consoles, or with the less resource intensive 3DS port.

If they were to do a mechanically faithful port of World to the switch, all of the compromises and sacrifices would have to be visual, and so severe as to make the game look nothing like it's counterparts. Indeed it would have to look more basic and rudimentary than the current MHXX already does, and as I've pointed out, that game has itself already set the standard for MH on Switch. They are simply incapable of matching at least the visuals of MHXX while doing all of the extra background legwork that makes World a huge departure from previous games, on a system with a fraction of the computational horsepower and half the RAM (Switch has 4GB to the other's 8GB).

Shit just ain't happening, and even if it were possible, the game would necessarily be so butchered (visually or mechanically) as to not be worth the effort. The Switch will get more MH games in the future I'm sure, and they may even borrow design ideas from World, but the Switch is not going to see a faithful port of World as it currently stands. As of right now, a faithful Switch port is about as likely as an ice-cube dog managing to catch an asbestos cat in Hell.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
29-06-2017, 04:10 AM
RE: Monster Hunter World
(29-06-2017 03:58 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(29-06-2017 03:18 AM)JesseB Wrote:  >.> Don't forget there was once people that said 480i was better than 1080p or made claims they couldn't see the difference.... (but then again 1080p advertised on 480i TV's made about as much sense as trying to swim carrying an anchor). Just saying that particular brand of stupid has been around a long time.


Yeah, I know, it's just frustrating. I mean, I went to school for this shit. That doesn't make me infallible by any means, but given how much I keep up on this stuff, I'd consider myself to have an informed opinion on the matter.

I love the Switch, and would love to see a version of World on it, if I seriously thought the hardware was capable of such without making severe sacrifices.

The Switch is, at it's heart, a glorified smartphone. Not even that glorified, as flagship smart phones have been outperforming the Switch's capabilities for years; the device has launched well behind the technology curve. The system is a modified SOC (system on chip) nVidia Tegra X1, which contain a quad core ARM Cortex A57. Compare that to the X86 based 8-core AMD Jaguar CPU's found in the PS4 and Xbox One, and there's a huge disparity in computational horsepower. Plus, the difference between ARM and X86 is important to consider.







The developers themselves, when asked why this game is coming to new home consoles and PC and hasn't been announced for the Switch, flat out said that it was because the newer consoles had the power to do the things they always had wanted to but never had enough power to do before. The Switch is on par with the Xbox 360 and PS3, and if they had enough power to do what they wanted to in World, they'd simply have already done it.

The game is moving from a series of distinct and interconnected battle arenas, to a single contiguous map, which itself comes in at more than twice the size of the older layouts. The game is going full Western RPG by now incorporating design ideas from the Immersive Sim sub-genre (Deus Ex, Thief, Dishonored, Fallout), in having a large clock-work world with a bunch of overlapping elements that can interact with one another to create emergent gameplay. There are many monsters in each area, all running far more complex AI routine, that enable them to better interact with the environment, the hunters, and other monsters. The hunters themselves are far more mobile than ever before, displaying a level of terrain traversal heretofore unseen in the series. Many of the game's staple mechanics are now built into the environment, with plants and smaller animals acting as triggers for everything from smoke bombs, paintballs (for tracking in previous titles), shock traps, and poison bombs. The environment itself can be destroyed in ways that fundamentally alter the map, such as destroying a wall and unleashing a makeshift waterfall to wash away the Rathalos off the edge of a cliff.

Now technically, they could get World running on the Switch. It would probably look like hell and run just as bad, but for the sake of argument it could technically be done (assuming they can get their engine running on the ARM instruction set). But that won't stop the delusional from being convinced that an announcement for the Switch version, looking comparable to what has already been shown, is just around the corner.

That's preposterous.

Besides everything I've already outlined above, there are two other important facts to consider. The Switch is already getting a Monster Hunter title, a port of Monster Hunter: Double Cross (MHXX). This title is an upscale version of the same game already available on the 3DS in Japan (yes, the 3DS is ARM based, so it's a rather straightforward port). So this game has set a precedent not only for player expectation of what a MH game will look like on the platform, but of what Capcom is capable of doing on the system. This higher resolution version of a 3DS game runs at 30 frames per second. What we've seen of World so far also has that game running at a very smooth 30 frames per second, and as already shown, on demonstrably more powerful hardware.

If the teams at Capcom were capable of the coding and technical wizardry needed to get the Switch to run a version of World in anything close to what has been shown, and do so at 30 frames per second? They'd be more than capable of getting the Switch version of MHXX to run at a rock solid 60 frames per second, and likewise they should be capable of 60 frames per second on the PS4 and Xbox One. Which would be great, I'd love it if their tech was that streamlined and their programmers were really that good; those would be markedly improved experiences for both of those games after all. But they aren't making 60 FPS, either with their flagship title on the more powerful home consoles, or with the less resource intensive 3DS port.

If they were to do a mechanically faithful port of World to the switch, all of the compromises and sacrifices would have to be visual, and so severe as to make the game look nothing like it's counterparts. Indeed it would have to look more basic and rudimentary than the current MHXX already does, and as I've pointed out, that game has itself already set the standard for MH on Switch. They are simply incapable of matching at least the visuals of MHXX while doing all of the extra background legwork that makes World a huge departure from previous games, on a system with a fraction of the computational horsepower and half the RAM (Switch has 4GB to the other's 8GB).

Shit just ain't happening, and even if it were possible, the game would necessarily be so butchered (visually or mechanically) as to not be worth the effort. The Switch will get more MH games in the future I'm sure, and they may even borrow design ideas from World, but the Switch is not going to see a faithful port of World as it currently stands. As of right now, a faithful Switch port is about as likely as an ice-cube dog managing to catch an asbestos cat in Hell.

I'll admit I'm tired and that's a lot you wrote, but I'm pretty sure I agree on every point you made regarding the Switch. And yea people who try to tell themselves that the switch is as powerful as say a PS4 or Xbox one is painfully ignorant, kinda like people who say a PS4 or Xbox One are as powerful as a good Gaming PC, they are just laughably wrong. That's not to take away from what each of those devices are, they are all great gaming devices in their own right (though I prefer PC, PS4, Switch personally, mostly cause most of my favorite RPG's that never get ports are on Playstation)

DLJ Wrote:And, yes, the principle of freedom of expression works both ways... if someone starts shit, better shit is the best counter-argument.
Big Grin
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-07-2017, 12:56 PM
RE: Monster Hunter World
Well, they finally released an English gameplay video.

Also, it's not a 720p compressed Japanese live-stream, so that's a plus.




[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes EvolutionKills's post
06-07-2017, 08:02 PM
RE: Monster Hunter World
Fuck it looks good.

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes earmuffs's post
06-07-2017, 09:27 PM (This post was last modified: 06-07-2017 09:30 PM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Monster Hunter World
(06-07-2017 08:02 PM)earmuffs Wrote:  Fuck it looks good.

Indeed it does.

4-player co-op Dark Souls, where you turn the bodies of your defeated enemies into weapons and armor.

Also, small bi-pedal cat people who make incessant cat puns and look oh-so adorable.

What's not to love?







Okay, well, maybe not Mittens...

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
07-07-2017, 09:29 PM
RE: Monster Hunter World
Guess what?

Turns out that the Monster Hunter Reddit community is a bunch of circle-jerking cunts, including the moderators.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2017, 01:45 AM
RE: Monster Hunter World
Duh. It's video games bro, people are stupidly passionate about this shit. They're like those hardcore soccer fans that support one team and beat up anyone that supports another team. Let me guess? People are salty because it's coming to PS4/Xbox One/PC?

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2017, 02:02 AM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2017 02:13 AM by EvolutionKills.)
RE: Monster Hunter World
(08-07-2017 01:45 AM)earmuffs Wrote:  Duh. It's video games bro, people are stupidly passionate about this shit. They're like those hardcore soccer fans that support one team and beat up anyone that supports another team. Let me guess? People are salty because it's coming to PS4/Xbox One/PC?

More like people got REALLY SALTY over an earlier version of the 'Switch most likely will not get a port of MH:World' that I posted earlier in this thread. A few paragraphs long, coolly explaining the simple realities of game development, hardware limitations, and emphasizing the words of the developers themselves ("earlier consoles lacked the power to do what we had originally envisioned").

Then yesterday there was a post about 'Who's hyped for the World Intro Movie?', which tuned into a circle jerk. So I was like "Not really hyped for a FMV used to sell a game I'm already sold on, and that we'll all skip past in the game itself once we've seen it half a dozen times. I'd rather see more gameplay honestly." So of course, since I was not HYPED TO THE MAX, I got down voted. I guess they missed the part when I said that I was already all in, I was already sold on the game? Reading comprehension is not Reddit's strong suite. Not just that, but someone else commented on that fact, along the lines of 'WTF are you getting down voted for? Hive mind is scary". Which I replied to "Yeah, same thing happened when I opined about a Switch port of World and about how that was very unlikely'. I then had a REDDIT MODERATOR get on my fucking ass about that, because the subject was 'sensitive'.

Me simply referencing an earlier occurrence of being slagged off by the Reddit circle jerk had a Reddit Moderator reporting my post, because the circle jerk's were 'sensitive' to less than unanimous opinions.

Fuck that entire petulant community.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2017, 06:09 AM
RE: Monster Hunter World
Cancer gonna cancer.

[Image: oscar.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: