Really concerned about the monster roster count...

[Syphael]

I was doing some research about the large monster count from previous games, and even going as far as to replay Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate, and I'm starting to worry about the length of the base game for the price tag...

So in base world we had 36 large monsters, and with Iceborne that number jumps up to 71 which is pretty respectable. Rise had 46 large monsters in the base game, and with Sunbreak the number jumped up to 78 which is great. Still, MHGU had the luxury of bundling multiple generations of monsters (4 generations) all into one game which brought the large monster count to an unmatched 93 large monsters.

Which brings me to my main concern with Wilds. Currently there is approximately 30 large monsters give or take (Some large monsters may be hidden due to spoilers of course) but I'm not sure I want to play a game essentially the length of base world all over again... On top of that we have 1 new monster coming in Spring, potentially probably 4 down the line (per quarter or 1 new large monster every 3 months)

My whole point about this topic is to ask if my worry is warranted. Am I overreacting here? Be honest with me. As for a big question to my other fellow hunters, do you guys think having a big roster matters that much? I do prefer quality over quantity, but I never minded having reskins of monsters as long as they were unique enough with their moveset. I personally love seeing returning monsters as well as new monsters. Maybe fighting monsters over again in high rank will add more value, I did forget to account for re-fighting previous monsters.

[Alias_V]

Well if you looking for good news I would look over the first few weeks/months of rise and worlds. It good to keep in mind they have been moving towards a more live service method of releasing monsters. So there a good chance a couple more will show up like Pickle or something. So there a solid chance it going to a more constant drip.

To add to it me personally I want new move sets more than I care about them being designated as new monsters or not. When you use a weapon as long as well most hunters do having a main. The games don't often mess with your move set. I've been doing the same three pokes for literal DECADES. So learning what the monsters have on offer is more important to me than a set number. Especially as monster hunter has reused bone structures for monsters and their move sets like it's going out of style. You quickly start to tell even supposed new monsters base movesets are as you watch them move. Often by the very type of wyvern they call them. Fanged, winged, leviathian, etc.

So the bad news. It's not all new monsters. Rathian already shown for sure which means Rathalos and i'm sure they are gonna try to pawn Pink/silver/gold/blue and every other colour off as different fights. So the number of new interesting fights is probably lower than you think. And I've never known monster hunter not to cntrl C cntrl V when presented with a chance.

Silver lining? There are a lot of weapons and a decent amount of variety within. Finding a weapon is great, but if you looking to bring up challenge and spice its a good idea to have. Going from slow to fast or simply adding another resource to manage or taking to the skies... high in the sky Cliff Racer!

TLDR I'm okay with giving it a shot as I expect some additions added as we go along the time line. I will also probably take this as the chance to try a new weapon at the start to make sure there is enough new there.

[Mattrex]

All else being equal, I prefer a large roster. And while 30 is on the low side, and is theoretically disappointing, a sober look at the numbers doesn't give me any cause for alarm.

World has 36 large monsters, but four of them were added in title updates, so there were 32 on launch. Wilds having "only" 30 large monsters on launch - assuming that's even the correct count - is so close to World's count that I don't feel like it's even worth thinking about.

Iceborne almost doubled the roster size compared to World. Similarly, Sunbreak enlarged the roster by a little less than double. I fully expect the G version of Wilds to do exactly the same, unless and until I see evidence suggesting it won't.

[Sawblade Shieldslave]

if you think 30 monsters is bad look at monster hunter tri (was still a great game tbh)

[Cú/Moon]

It's the successor to world, we'll see regular title updates to lengthen the roster. while I'd prefer a game be complete at launch, the series has always headed this way with content updates.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sawblade Shieldslave:

(was still a great game tbh)

*cough, best *cough

[★ Moonlight ★]

World had 30 on launch, with one of them being Zorah.
Leshin, ancient leshin, behemoth, pickle, Kulve, and Lunastra were all title updates.
Don't sweat it too much they'll add more in updates.
This is literally in line with World

[pavilion5097]

World had 30 monsters on day 1 release 36 is the number it had after all title updates.
Rise had 37 on day 1 release. 46 is after all the title updates. Rise was also made for the switch so a bit easier to port over monsters from older games compared to what Wilds is doing.

Wilds roster has more variety and very few monsters look alike where as take world many monsters were similar Uraggan and Radoban, Kulu-ya-ku and Tziti ya ku for example. I don't think Wilds has as many fodder monsters so having 1 less large monster then World won't feel bad if all fights are fun.

[Sawblade Shieldslave]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Cú/Moon:

It's the successor to world, we'll see regular title updates to lengthen the roster. while I'd prefer a game be complete at launch, the series has always headed this way with content updates.

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Sawblade Shieldslave:

(was still a great game tbh)

*cough, best *cough

as much as i love tri and HATE rise i weirdly love online even more

[Syphael]

Thanks for the comments so far everyone. I appreciate it. I feel a bit better after thinking about these comments. Another thing I didn't consider initially is that I actually spent a considerable amount of time with World when it first came out, and hopefully there is some current "endgame" stuff to do. I read one reviewer had 150 hours in, so that also makes me feel better about having stuff to do off and on while we patiently wait for updates.

I should probably think of it more like a marathon than a race and try out some new weapon types instead of sticking to one or two like I normally do. I know Monster Hunter Worlds was criticized a lot for the grindy aspects of the game, but I actually do enjoy the grind when it comes down to it. The only thing I never enjoyed grinding for was charms, but hey, this is Monster Hunter and everybody knows what they get into when they start farming for charms or decorations.

[RedViper]

Lol I stopped reading after I read the lie of base World having 36 monsters… 6 of them were added in patches after the release. World released with 30 monsters and while trying to avoid spoilers I was able to find that there could be 34 monsters in Wilds at launch…. It doesn't seem like Wilds has fewer monsters than World now, right?

[Alias_V]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Syphael:

The only thing I never enjoyed grinding for was charms, but hey, this is Monster Hunter and everybody knows what they get into when they start farming for charms or decorations.

It always helps me to know what I need for decorations only. There are always tons of armour sets for every kind of damage combo you could want. Once you know "These are required for my weapon." everything else becomes a bonus! Especially if you lance like me as there is usually one to two sets ever in a game that are lance spec'd. So for me it Guard/guard up to set levels and then whatever cutdown on time.

[SirRoflHop]

i SEVERELY needed to read this. I was incredibly dishearted like the OP about running out of new content after 100 hours played already. I’m currently just fleshing out new builds while I wait for content updates and I’ve grown bored with worlds surprisingly but it’s on and off. When I’m tired of the rinse and repeat same 6 months or so in wilds I run over to world and it’s been fine.

I’m just not ready to wait a year or more to wait for that roster to double and it may be more than a year. I want more NOW. lol.

This overall conversation really helped put my impatient exhilaration with this game into perspective towards the future. The wait will be a grind but once we are there it will feel SO good.

[Varagonax]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Syphael:

I was doing some research about the large monster count from previous games, and even going as far as to replay Monster Hunter Generations Ultimate, and I'm starting to worry about the length of the base game for the price tag...

So in base world we had 36 large monsters, and with Iceborne that number jumps up to 71 which is pretty respectable. Rise had 46 large monsters in the base game, and with Sunbreak the number jumped up to 78 which is great. Still, MHGU had the luxury of bundling multiple generations of monsters (4 generations) all into one game which brought the large monster count to an unmatched 93 large monsters.

Which brings me to my main concern with Wilds. Currently there is approximately 30 large monsters give or take (Some large monsters may be hidden due to spoilers of course) but I'm not sure I want to play a game essentially the length of base world all over again... On top of that we have 1 new monster coming in Spring, potentially probably 4 down the line (per quarter or 1 new large monster every 3 months)

My whole point about this topic is to ask if my worry is warranted. Am I overreacting here? Be honest with me. As for a big question to my other fellow hunters, do you guys think having a big roster matters that much? I do prefer quality over quantity, but I never minded having reskins of monsters as long as they were unique enough with their moveset. I personally love seeing returning monsters as well as new monsters. Maybe fighting monsters over again in high rank will add more value, I did forget to account for re-fighting previous monsters.

Its one less monster on release than World. 3 less then Rise? Ill double check.

You gotta remember that World didnt release with all of its monsters. Deviljho, Lunastra ect all came around as title updates.

[RestfulCrow]

World had 30 and some were just variants or whatever. So it's not much different.

[GamingWithSilvertail]

Why is this topic bumped? It was litterally filled with missinformation...

[Hardwenzen]

I will never understand how a massive dev like capcom, one that has been reshing the same monsters for 21 years, has trouble introducing a minimum of 100 monsters on launch. There is absolutely no excuse for this not being the case in a $70 flagship title.