I don't understand people anymore...

[Xartain]

Who cares that the !"LOW RANK"! Story is only 15 hours?

As far as i know the story of Rise was, when you realy tried, a bit over 5 hours.
Monster Hunter games never where about the story.
The Story was only a device to give Hunters a somewhat understandable reason to hunt Monster.
The real game starts after the credits.
I for my part sank about 800 hours into MH World base game (PS4 + PC)
the same goes for Rise.

I cant believe that there are so many Jester farmers, who could need so many points?
I just hope that the Grind isn't to easy because i have fun trying to dodge the desire sensor :D

Happy Hunting

[Zhanzara]

It is the release of a massive Game. It is the same like this over and over again with every single big release. People are complaining about things just because they WANT to complain. Even before the game is out to everyone.
But you shouldn´t forget: The people who are silent, happy and looking forward to the game are MUCH more. They don´t care about these trolls and you shouldn´t neither =)

[✞Louie305✞]

Gaming Journalists only play until the end credits, most of them aren't fans of the series.

[Shoah Kahn]

No one cares about low rank, which, in and of itself should tell Capcom that something is wrong about how they design the game... Perhaps allowing players to skip the LR story and go straight it HR, could be a solution (?).

However, the concerns aren't that the easiest "rank" is easy; it's that the entire base game is -- a game that's not being sold at some discounted price, with the promise of the "full" product to be added for free later on. If people are bored of the game in a month or two, will they even stick around for 12+ months for the expansion?... It's a bad game design model, even from a marketing standpoint.

[Kabaale]

That's not 15 hours for the story but from the start of the game to the last hunt of the story.
If wild had 15 hours story,it would be enough,even too much but that's not it.

[Naamtar]

Don't get your hopes up for a game before you've played it and you'll never be disappointed. :)

Don't lower your opinion of a game before you've played it, either.

Their opinions should never hold enough weight to sway you one way or the other with regards to your enjoyment of video games and how you spend your own money. They are irrelevant until you let them become relevant.

These people seek purpose and control on the internet because they lack it in their real lives.

[Shoah Kahn]

Originally posted by ✞Louie305✞:

Gaming Journalists only play until the end credits, most of them aren't fans of the series.

Fundamentally incorrect. This guy played it for nearly 80 hours before reviewing it, which is well above the call of duty; and he openly admits to being a scrub, only to find that the game is insultingly easy anyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5kxnAxmxMI

Even the IGN reviewer implied playing it for 30+ hours, and also complained about lack of any real challenge--even in post-game!

[Cú/Moon]

Originally posted by Shoah Kahn:

something is wrong about how they design the game... Perhaps allowing players to skip the LR story and go straight it HR, could be a solution (?).

Low rank is fine as long as they make the mats useful for high rank.

[Nezuko Pizza Delivery]

Happy hunting

[✞Louie305✞]

Originally posted by Shoah Kahn:

Originally posted by ✞Louie305✞:

Gaming Journalists only play until the end credits, most of them aren't fans of the series.

Fundamentally incorrect. This guy played it for nearly 80 hours before reviewing it, which is well above the call of duty; and he openly admits to being a scrub, only to find that the game is insultingly easy anyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5kxnAxmxMI

Even the IGN reviewer implied playing it for 30+ hours, and also complained about lack of any real challenge--even in post-game!

You lose all credibility in anything you are saying when you bring up IGN.

[GingerAvenger]

The only person that matters is yourself. You know what you like and dislike. No one else should ever be allowed to choose what you should do with your time or money and you should never allow anyone to dictate that for you.

[Xartain]

Originally posted by Shoah Kahn:

Originally posted by ✞Louie305✞:

Gaming Journalists only play until the end credits, most of them aren't fans of the series.

Fundamentally incorrect. This guy played it for nearly 80 hours before reviewing it, which is well above the call of duty; and he openly admits to being a scrub, only to find that the game is insultingly easy anyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5kxnAxmxMI

Even the IGN reviewer implied playing it for 30+ hours, and also complained about lack of any real challenge--even in post-game!

Did you realy just cite a IGN review?

just to make things a bit more cleare IGN gave World a 9.5/10 rating (player rating was a 8.6/10)
And i think that was a rating that fits (for that time)
But now they have given Wilds a 8/10 rating while giving DA: Veilguard a 9/10 while the players gave it a 6.9/10
So i think IGN has fallen off in the way they have gotten out of touch with the Players.

[Kiririn]

It's not just low rank.

"Wilds never challenged me with any real threats, even in the endgame." - IGN

"...even with the absolute minimum of gear upgrades, I still haven't failed a quest some 40 hours in." - Eurogamer

If you want a non mainstream reviewer to tell you like it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BYno6GOjl9M

[Vaigrant]

Originally posted by Xartain:

Originally posted by Shoah Kahn:

Fundamentally incorrect. This guy played it for nearly 80 hours before reviewing it, which is well above the call of duty; and he openly admits to being a scrub, only to find that the game is insultingly easy anyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5kxnAxmxMI

Even the IGN reviewer implied playing it for 30+ hours, and also complained about lack of any real challenge--even in post-game!

Did you realy just cite a IGN review? :MHRISE_Felyne:

just to make things a bit more cleare IGN gave World a 9.5/10 rating (player rating was a 8.6/10)
And i think that was a rating that fits (for that time)
But now they have given Wilds a 8/10 rating while giving DA: Veilguard a 9/10 while the players gave it a 6.9/10
So i think IGN has fallen off in the way they have gotten out of touch with the Players.

What I find funniest. Is that its always the IGN article being quoted and That one specific video. I've seen them both at least 20 times, sometimes repeated in the same thread.

ACG was brought up for a bit, until you know people watched it and he stated it was specifically Low Rank that was easy...so they don't link that video anymore.

[Streylok]

If I were you I would stop listening to morons opinions on things and form your own conclusion. If all you do in life is listen to people complain instead of experiencing something yourself and drawing your own conclusion you'll end up missing out on something you might have liked. Nobody in this world is the same /hates or likes the same things.

[Shoah Kahn]

Originally posted by ✞Louie305✞:

You lose all credibility in anything you are saying when you bring up IGN.

I thought IGN were the "everything's 10/10", not the "everything must be nitpicked" game reviewers...? Now, I'm confused 🥴