Monster Hunter Wilds

Monster Hunter Wilds

View Stats:
Mixed reviews.
So what is it about this game that the reviews are mixed? poor performance? lack of content? i know this game was hugely anticipated for a long time, but it seems like fans are unhappy. i've had my eye on this game for awhile, but it seems like it's not worth the money atm.
< >
Showing 1-15 of 52 comments
Clayman 8 May 11 @ 11:53am 
A bit of everything with a dash of "people being crybabies".

Game is a bit buggy/laggy at times, despite running on heavy machine that *should* be able to run it optimally. Inversely, some people with "weaker" stuff can play it perfectly. I often see people ♥♥♥♥♥ that their NASA-level computers cant even start the game or get past the main menu, while i play mine off a laptop and an EXTERNAL hard drive and only crashed on me once in over 70hrs of playtime (at HR56 level wise).

Content has been a bit slow, but then again im guessing its also because people are so spoon-fed these days that they expect sorry are entitled to new things every 3 weeks despite the fact we got a new monster added, the Blossom event being made and other returning smaller event hunts (that give you stuff too).
meh324 May 11 @ 11:57am 
optimization sucks
Ottomic May 11 @ 12:21pm 
Originally posted by Magnadeus:
So what is it about this game that the reviews are mixed? poor performance? lack of content? i know this game was hugely anticipated for a long time, but it seems like fans are unhappy. i've had my eye on this game for awhile, but it seems like it's not worth the money atm.

The game running like crap (and crucially, looking mid at best while doing so) is a big thing, but it also has these unskippable story segments that keep limiting what you can do at a time, which is a first in a monster hunter game and has been quite badly received, then there's the story itself, centered around the stupidest child in the planet and how special he is, then there's the fact that the game tends to drop inputs at the worst moments (at least with charge blade), and the differences to both player and monster movesets that make moves hard to read, hard to predict, and frustrating to deal with a lot of the time.

Imo this game is absolutely not worth $70, and it'd be a hard sell at $50 assuming you have a 5070 or above (which is the only thing that can approach running it at 60 fps with anywhere near decent visual fidelity).
Last edited by Ottomic; May 11 @ 12:23pm
The only reason it's mixed is because of performance, people complain about gameplay and story, but it's really dependent on what you value in a monster hunter game the most (I'm an ecology hunter so Wilds has been nothing but phenomenal for me, pretty much everything I want outside of a few outstanding issues)

The only reason I'd personally say not to buy the game is because of performance, which is unacceptably bad. Everything else is either incredible or acceptable!
Dae May 11 @ 12:54pm 
  • Optimisation. Self-explanatory.
  • Terrible visuals, it looks worse than World which is seven years older.
  • Casualisation. Game is much easier as monsters have lower HP pools. No need to prep for anything. No need to hunt the mob. Mashable, autoaimed, mob grounding Focus Strike mechanic is more braindead than World claw wallbang.
  • Lack of endgame or even content in general, even more so than day 1 World did.

The review status is justified.
Last edited by Dae; May 11 @ 12:56pm
Why are so many people saying terrible visuals? With the exception of some textures in cutscenes it looks fine.
Old Madao May 11 @ 1:05pm 
Originally posted by dgresevfan:
Why are so many people saying terrible visuals? With the exception of some textures in cutscenes it looks fine.
cause they have pc which cant actually run game on ultra, and on lower settings game looks not so good, its kinda funny same haters always answer here. and reviews are not justified. Same as when elden ring dlc came out it had mixed cause why too many stupid ppl, its like those ppl just want to hate things.
Last edited by Old Madao; May 11 @ 1:08pm
Ottomic May 11 @ 1:10pm 
Originally posted by dgresevfan:
Why are so many people saying terrible visuals? With the exception of some textures in cutscenes it looks fine.

"high" preset screenshots. These visuals can be reproduced in any rig.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3477691600
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3477691008
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3477690883
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3457167986

Performance *is* rig dependant, and while terrible across the board, it can be brute forced through with enough of an overkill computer. Visual fidelity is ♥♥♥♥ regardless of the computer you run it in.

Anything below "high" with the high resolution pack DLC results in abhorrent visual fidelity, and I'm being generous and ignoring the lighting system since, thank christ, it can be solved by a mod released yesterday.

EDIT: Actually, I'm playing on "high" textures with the high res texture pack. Just took a random screenshot from where I am at the moment.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3480061431

This is some Rise ♥♥♥♥.
Last edited by Ottomic; May 11 @ 1:19pm
I must admit that looks a bit like ass. I've come to expect anything under Ultra settings in a lot of games to look unforgivably crappy and so I never even try.

I'm on ultra. I'm just wondering if I should give that texture pack a try but I know people with 4090s and high end systems were struggling with it originally. Did it ever improve?
wololo May 11 @ 1:38pm 
Just because some people have not encountered certain issues it doesn't mean those issues don't exist. There's a reason for those mixed reviews.

MH is my favourite game series and this is the worst quality release I have come across among all games I have ever played, not just in MH.

I do, however, concede that it is getting a bit better by the weeks. It's still not consistently stable though.

As for content, it's alright given that the game is just out and has a bit more free content updates promised on the long run.
Last edited by wololo; May 11 @ 1:47pm
Originally posted by Old Madao:
Originally posted by dgresevfan:
Why are so many people saying terrible visuals? With the exception of some textures in cutscenes it looks fine.
cause they have pc which cant actually run game on ultra, and on lower settings game looks not so good, its kinda funny same haters always answer here. and reviews are not justified. Same as when elden ring dlc came out it had mixed cause why too many stupid ppl, its like those ppl just want to hate things.
Than they flock to FSR thinking it is gonna work good when it doesn't like you can go on YT and see shimmering, ghosting, rips on the bottom of your screen because in some instances it can't keep up with shadows, higher latency inputs, etc. I tested this feature and it genuinely makes no sense to use this unless you are desperate for anything.

Even worse when you are using it on a nvidia card and not an AMD card because at that point it is even less optimal.
Last edited by LegionXNX; May 11 @ 1:53pm
MrSoul May 11 @ 2:07pm 
After 68 hours, with a few crashes, and bugs here and there.
I honestly have no clue why they arent more positive. Game is great fun overall.
Last edited by MrSoul; May 11 @ 2:07pm
As a first time hunter I've been having a great time. Optimization isn't all there but I think most of the whinging is from long-time fans who have a problem with this that or the other change from what they are used to.
Originally posted by Ottomic:
Originally posted by dgresevfan:
Why are so many people saying terrible visuals? With the exception of some textures in cutscenes it looks fine.

"high" preset screenshots. These visuals can be reproduced in any rig.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3477691600
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3477691008
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3477690883
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3457167986

Performance *is* rig dependant, and while terrible across the board, it can be brute forced through with enough of an overkill computer. Visual fidelity is ♥♥♥♥ regardless of the computer you run it in.

Anything below "high" with the high resolution pack DLC results in abhorrent visual fidelity, and I'm being generous and ignoring the lighting system since, thank christ, it can be solved by a mod released yesterday.

EDIT: Actually, I'm playing on "high" textures with the high res texture pack. Just took a random screenshot from where I am at the moment.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3480061431

This is some Rise ♥♥♥♥.
you can find those textures in every games, especially if you are actually looking for them, found them recently in blackmyth and in many other games, there are always those weird textures in every game. Also i tried to mimic spot cause i dont trust ppl who post here stuff : https://imgur.com/a/K9ytuSo are you sure buddy you actually play on high texture settings, cause somehow your ♥♥♥♥ looks way worse
Last edited by Old Madao; May 11 @ 2:41pm
Ottomic May 11 @ 2:49pm 
Originally posted by dgresevfan:
I'm on ultra. I'm just wondering if I should give that texture pack a try but I know people with 4090s and high end systems were struggling with it originally. Did it ever improve?

Honestly, I didn't see much of a performance impact, and unless you are really tight on storage, it is an absolute must. The store page lists that it will only affect "ultra", but in reality it will improve every texture setting. "Medium" and below will still look like barf with it, but it will get "high" from "eyesore" into "okay".

(it also says it requires 16 gb vram, but on "high" at 2k it will not go past 6 gb vram so it can be ran on an 8gb card no problem)

Originally posted by Old Madao:
you can find those textures in every games, especially if you are actually looking for them

Absolutely. The problem is that with this game they just keep popping up. As someone who's trying really, REALLY hard to enjoy this game, believe me when I say that I'm not exactly itching to find eyesores in it, but they just keep cropping up. Every cutscene has some ♥♥♥♥♥♥ blurry ass texture somewhere prominent, every location has a few things that look straight out of a PS3 launch title.

And if it was a budget, even a AA title, okay. I don't own any that off the top of my head is this inconsistent with fidelity, but sure. If it could be ran at a steady 60 fps, okay. But it's a $70 recent release that needs framegen to reach 60 fps on anything but the very top end of GPUs. One that seemingly capcom considers to be in an acceptable enough state as to not need any post-release updates regarding its technical state.

I'm not saying it's an unplayable mess, because I sure am trying hard to get my money's worth, but regardless of how much you enjoy it, it's technically very inconsistent at the best of times, and we owe it to ourselves as fans of the series to at least acknowledge it.
Last edited by Ottomic; May 11 @ 2:55pm
< >
Showing 1-15 of 52 comments
Per page: 1530 50