What makes Monster Hunter so popular?

[Troy21]

The game is a lot better than the demo is. You hunt a massive variety of all sorts of different monsters, and the really cool monsters even have different variations of themselves. It's pretty much the thrill of the hunt that makes everyone so eager to play. When i first went against gogmazios(one of the final bosses) I lasted exactly 1:23 seconds before my third life was taken. I practiced a lot more, learning all of his moves, and timing how long I had to dodge those moves. When I went against him a month later, I chopped of his tail, broke most of his parts, and finally beat the game in 25 minutes. I was extremely stoked and I repeatedly battled him enough to get his full armor set(which I fully upgraded to 729 defense) A SNS and an IG from him. Same thing with the zinogre(My profile pic and my favorite monster) When i first battled him at low rank, I made an epic fail. I spent weeks battling him and failing, until I took it to the next level and somehow defeated him in 10 minutes. The people who play it mostly love it all the way around. Plus, there are really cool armors and weapons in the game.

 

[3823]

There's so much to do. The game is alsooo very challenging. Challenging to the point of wasting 50 mins on fighting a monster and failing. ;~;

Some reasons why:

• Whole game consists of boss fights
• Not just any boss fights >.<)/ Strategic boss fights :3
• Super realistic and intense
• Sooo many weapons and armor to collect ;u;
• Co-op play? \o

 

[25110]

I wouldn't call it popular though, it's a very solid and awesome game that I'd recommend to many, but popular...? I dunno about that.

 

[Iridium Winter]

I wouldn't call it popular though, it's a very solid and awesome game that I'd recommend to many, but popular...? I dunno about that.

It is in Japan, but that's a completely different culture

 

[25110]

Yeah, for sure, I mean I wish it was more popular in the west because then we might get the games sooner, or at all.

 

[PersonSP]

Just an honest question,because I personally played the 3DS demo of the game and didn't like it too much...what is Monster Hunter's most prominent feature that makes it so popular according to you guys?.

Same here. People like the realism but to me that makes matters worse. At some point the monsters were running away from me and I just felt sorry for them. I mean, I attacked them first, they weren't doing anything wrong! Killing monsters was hella easy too, just buttonmashing until it dies. I guess running around the map killing things just isn't my style.

 

[Hayleia]

Why did non one mention the scenario ?

I think it's really the co-op aspect of it and the atmosphere of the online play. You're all in that hall with that wonderful music trying to make you forget you just lost to that Gore Magala that you all need to do once to get to the next HR, and you all help each other because you're all in the same situation. And there can't be salt as seen in Smash, only disapointement at worst.

Same here. People like the realism but to me that makes matters worse. At some point the monsters were running away from me and I just felt sorry for them. I mean, I attacked them first, they weren't doing anything wrong!

Capture them then, don't kill them. Then imagine you release them far from your village where they don't bother you. And realism would be more annoying in other games but here, that's the core of the game. You can't just heal while running and stuff, you always have to think about what you do and do it right... which can be seen as annoying or fun, depends on people

Killing monsters was hella easy too, just buttonmashing until it dies. I guess running around the map killing things just isn't my style.

If you only tried the demo or the first quests, that's normal. They won't disgust you with a double Rajang quest before you even start playing. But I can tell you a double Rajang quest isn't "hella easy". Even one Fatalis is annoying. Even the HR7 Fatalis carted me twice when I solo'd it with my G-Rank set -.-

I mean, I attacked them first, they weren't doing anything wrong!

Like there is a reason in Smash for people to fight each other

 

[PersonSP]

Why did non one mention the scenario ?

I think it's really the co-op aspect of it and the atmosphere of the online play. You're all in that hall with that wonderful music trying to make you forget you just lost to that Gore Magala that you all need to do once to get to the next HR, and you all help each other because you're all in the same situation. And there can't be salt as seen in Smash, only disapointement at worst.
Capture them then, don't kill them. Then imagine you release them far from your village where they don't bother you. And realism would be more annoying in other games but here, that's the core of the game. You can't just heal while running and stuff, you always have to think about what you do and do it right... which can be seen as annoying or fun, depends on people
If you only tried the demo or the first quests, that's normal. They won't disgust you with a double Rajang quest before you even start playing. But I can tell you a double Rajang quest isn't "hella easy". Even one Fatalis is annoying. Even the HR7 Fatalis carted me twice when I solo'd it with my G-Rank set -.-
Like there is a reason in Smash for people to fight each other

Thanks for the explanation. As for Smash; I don't play Smash either, I really don't get the fight-without-reason games. I mean, yes, it requires skill and it can be fun, but I think I'd get bored after an hour or so if there is no plot. Everyone has their own taste.

 

[Iridium Winter]

I can't believe we're talking about realism in a game where you can bash a monster's skull in with a teddy bear

 

[Wariomovie]

Well, to put it simply, there is something about the concept of fighting giant and outlandish monsters with equally giant and outlandish weapons that appeals to me as well as other fans of the series. In addition, the massive amount of customization that can be done is another draw to the game that I also enjoy quite a bit.

 

[Hayleia]

Thanks for the explanation. As for Smash; I don't play Smash either, I really don't get the fight-without-reason games. I mean, yes, it requires skill and it can be fun, but I think I'd get bored after an hour or so if there is no plot. Everyone has their own taste.

Necro answer lol, sorry about that
As you say, everyone has their own taste so I'm not trying to convince you but I'll still defend "no-story" games a bit
As you can notice, most of them are actually multiplayer games, or even multiplayer-only games. And that's a big thing to understand for this kind of games.

First of all, a video game isn't a book or a movie. Take your favorite movie, add "gameplay" where you just have to press the A button after each time anyone speaks, and that gives a very bad game, even with an awesome story. "No-story" games on the contrary focus on gameplay in order to become maybe bad movies, but fun games. That's why you have tons of weapons in MH to choose from, and tons of characters to choose from in Smash. Because gameplays matters in a game!

For local multiplayer games, you can't really have a story. How do you expect friends who come at your place to play with you if they don't know the story and that's a requirement? With "no-story" games, that's not a problem. Everyone can pick Smash up anytime. And it's not limited to fighting games. Ever wondered why Mario and Bowser were racing together in Mario Kart? Well maybe, but if you didn't find the answer, it's that because gameplay is the reason why Mario Kart exists, not story.

And for online multiplayer games, you can't really include cutscenes where a player basically stops interacting with a world that keeps living without them, so that's another reason to limit the story to a minimum.

Now of course, this doesn't mean at all that games with a story are bad. On the contrary, there are a lot of "with-story" games that are awesome... but they're probably all single-player or 2-player max
I played Life is Strange for example and I really loved how it didn't have that much gameplay, but that gameplay's goal was to give more immersion into the story... but you can't really play Life is Strange with a friend behind you all the time, commenting on everything that happens on the screen, the same way you'll get bored with MH if you only play alone. You need to play each game the way it's supposed to be played (though even then, you'll still have to right to dislike it ).

 

[PersonSP]

Necro answer lol, sorry about that
As you say, everyone has their own taste so I'm not trying to convince you but I'll still defend "no-story" games a bit
As you can notice, most of them are actually multiplayer games, or even multiplayer-only games. And that's a big thing to understand for this kind of games.

First of all, a video game isn't a book or a movie. Take your favorite movie, add "gameplay" where you just have to press the A button after each time anyone speaks, and that gives a very bad game, even with an awesome story. "No-story" games on the contrary focus on gameplay in order to become maybe bad movies, but fun games. That's why you have tons of weapons in MH to choose from, and tons of characters to choose from in Smash. Because gameplays matters in a game!

For local multiplayer games, you can't really have a story. How do you expect friends who come at your place to play with you if they don't know the story and that's a requirement? With "no-story" games, that's not a problem. Everyone can pick Smash up anytime. And it's not limited to fighting games. Ever wondered why Mario and Bowser were racing together in Mario Kart? Well maybe, but if you didn't find the answer, it's that because gameplay is the reason why Mario Kart exists, not story.

And for online multiplayer games, you can't really include cutscenes where a player basically stops interacting with a world that keeps living without them, so that's another reason to limit the story to a minimum.

Now of course, this doesn't mean at all that games with a story are bad. On the contrary, there are a lot of "with-story" games that are awesome... but they're probably all single-player or 2-player max
I played Life is Strange for example and I really loved how it didn't have that much gameplay, but that gameplay's goal was to give more immersion into the story... but you can't really play Life is Strange with a friend behind you all the time, commenting on everything that happens on the screen, the same way you'll get bored with MH if you only play alone. You need to play each game the way it's supposed to be played (though even then, you'll still have to right to dislike it ).

Thou mortal darest summon me from my slumber?!

...

Anyhow, multiplayer usually isn't for me. There are ways to incorporate story in a multiplayer game, but those games are often awful. Fire Emblem Heroes does mix them quite well though.

 

[Hayleia]

Thou mortal darest summon me from my slumber?!

...

Anyhow, multiplayer usually isn't for me. There are ways to incorporate story in a multiplayer game, but those games are often awful. Fire Emblem Heroes does mix them quite well though.

Then that's why you don't like these games
I agree that MH feels like it lacks something when playing solo only. The """story""" is just an excuse to fight monsters, there is no real immersive atmosphere. Multiplayer actually gives that atmosphere, because you kind of feel like you are the hunter among other hunters (the other players), spending time in the hall and going on hunts.

 

[Gamer21]

A big thing for me with Monster Hunter was the cooperative gameplay. I loved being able to go out and raid with a small team of friends and talk amongst one another either via text or voice communication. The game lead to great adventures and the thrill of getting drops was always epic for new weapons and or armour upgrades. The armour sets and weapons were impressive and looked very intimidating, and the environment was Jurrasic like. Very enjoyable from my perspective!