Not gonna lie. This game feels kinda boring.

[Singularity's Marauder]

There is no hook for the story. The first 2 hours is just people explaining things to you. Like... You think I'm not going to know how to switch monsters and use their abilities and like... Oh, thanks for explaining to me that hitting a wall causes it to be broken, I was thinking that this is some sort of a 1980s cartoon where the background is inanimate.
What's this... UWU? You can skip encounters, but why would you do that, you are just going to be lacking materials, equipment and levels later on. So why even bother making those optional, just make them fun.
The intro is literally an exposition-fest. I have handled many games that used the first 2 mintues of the game to introduce just wholy ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ ♥♥♥♥... So much atmosphere, lore and personality in a matter of seconds. Like... Fallout 3, Hollow Knight, Celeste... Portal 2. Half Life 2. Black Mesa. Doom. Celeste.
The words and actions present within the intros of these games are as difficult to forget as the moment you got punched in the face as a little kid. They are just so interesting and inherently satisfying to watch.
Now, the Monster Sanctuary intro is just "long ago, I... Aku... RELEASED UNSPEAKABLE EVIL". Like, who cares... And there isn't even any interesting visuals. Just a bunch of ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ birds.
I hate birds.

[Wigd]

Aside from the games you listed being in completely different genres and going for a completely different tone as well as having extremely varying mechanics, I can kind of understand this criticism. I don't really enjjoy this game for the story, I like it because the gameplay is a lot of fun for me and the monsters are all great.

Also, I personally think fallout 3 has one of the most boring intros to any game i've ever played and it made me not want to play the game after the first 10 minutes. New vegas is a much much better example of a fallout game with a captivating intro.

[Singularity's Marauder]

Originally posted by Wigd:

Aside from the games you listed being in completely different genres and going for a completely different tone as well as having extremely varying mechanics, I can kind of understand this criticism. I don't really enjjoy this game for the story, I like it because the gameplay is a lot of fun for me and the monsters are all great.

Also, I personally think fallout 3 has one of the most boring intros to any game i've ever played and it made me not want to play the game after the first 10 minutes. New vegas is a much much better example of a fallout game with a captivating intro.

I was actually thinking about the intro cutscene not the intro Vault 101 ♥♥♥♥.
Although Vault 101 ♥♥♥♥ isn't actually that boring to be honest. It lasts about 20 minutes and then you are free to go towards any direction you damn please. This is truly open world gaming. In Fallout: New Vegas though you can either go North, where you will most likely die, unless you do like... Steal the Stealth Boy from the corpse of that Powder Ganger... Then you use it and pass the Cazadores. But you can also try be sneak about it, without the Stealth Boy. Maybe go that Highway where the Deathclaws are.
Well, that. Or you can go South, the normal way. And then be worshipped... Like...
I mean.
Both games have pretty boring beginnings.
Well, RPGs tend to be kinda boring. Their long dialogue kinda robs the game of replay value. I mean. This is not true to some RPGs like... Deus Ex has a lot of... Game styles that drastically allow you to play the game differently. And dialogue can be approached in. Oh...
Nevermind.

[DelSapri]

Maybe what you really like, is action games, with SOME mechanics of rpg, and not the rpg per se.
In general, the concept of a rpg involve some explanation, great number of texts, and some leveling. You know, the tabletop that is a origin of the concept of rpg.

[MKSKORP]

Better compare the intro to the Pokemon one. Which hardly had anything. But it is kind of the same game type.
The option to "skip" a battle is for times you just dont want to fight (just passing) or maybe you found an engagement with monsters you might not beat.
anyway, better having this option than not.

I wonder what kind of atmosthere you expected from a 2d plattformer.

If you want more atmo in a monster catch game, you can also have a look at Nexomons. Just startet and there is a huge monster in the beginning and some mystery. Maybe thats for you.
But still catching and grinding.

[Singularity's Marauder]

Originally posted by MKSKORP:

I wonder what kind of atmosthere you expected from a 2d plattformer.

Laughs in Hollow Knight

[☆Astarael☆]

This game is all about the monsters. If you aren't interested in that then you won't have a good time. Luckily they are many of them and each with multiple builds which keeps me interested in the game despite the bare bones story. I haven't had much issue with the lack story personally though

[Tenseiken]

You have some pretty valid criticism in there, but comparing it to pretty much every other genre out there without comparing it to the monster catching genre isn't fair. Expecting breathtaking athmosphere from a monster catcher is like expecting award-winning acting in porn. While I would certainly appreciate more athmosphere, I understand that it's simply not the genre to ask for. Sure it's a 2d platformer and we all know great metroidvania games like hollow knight or ori, but this isn't the same genre just because the movement and other small things are similar. It's primarly a monster catching game with a twist to make it stand out more and they've done a great job achieving exactly that. I really don't remember pokemon having any type of athmosphere or outstanding visual complexity. It's all about the monsters and the quality of the growing and catching aspect with just enough "story depth" to give you a guideline and athmosphere.

I think MS is a great game for what it is and they got MANY things more right than they got more wrong. The fusion of the fast movement and powers of a metroidvania game with the aspects of a typical monster catching game and the outstanding depth in each and every single monster had me really liking this game. I'd personally prefer more things to do post-game to grind items, because I think just the infinity arena isn't enough. Now, I know we'll get some post-game content soon with the new fights, but I don't know how re-playable and rewarding those fights are, so I can only really judge the game by how it is and has been for a long time now.

[Singularity's Marauder]

Originally posted by Tenseiken:

You have some pretty valid criticism in there, but comparing it to pretty much every other genre out there without comparing it to the monster catching genre isn't fair. Expecting breathtaking athmosphere from a monster catcher is like expecting award-winning acting in porn.

I don't think I want to continue reading this post.

[Morphic]

I mean, I understand the criticism since I somewhat agree.

Take another "monster catching" game... Geneforge. The intro is a bit of a text dump to setup who you are/the world... then the first ~10 minutes of gameplay is a tutorial/text dump further setting up the world. After that it is pretty much up to the player how they explore and if they want to choose dialogue options to get more flavor/info.

However, OP's sentiments come across as your typical "omfg I spent 5 minutes reading I want to play the game!1!!! I'm not a baby!!11!!"... then likely has no idea how to do certain things/what's going on. It really could be written better.

That doesn't mean it isn't valid. After all, some people don't care who/where they are... they just know they must kill/loot. Not to mention too much info/dump can be a major put-off to immersion/wanting to play... just as not enough info makes you not care.

(As an aside: Hollow Knight is vastly overrated, and this is coming from someone who 100%'ed it. The atmosphere is basically Dark Souls: A Bug's Life edition. Just as Salt and Sanctuary was Dark Souls: Paper Doll edition. Good games but not really unique/different.)

[Singularity's Marauder]

Originally posted by Morphic:

I mean, I understand the criticism since I somewhat agree.

Take another "monster catching" game... Geneforge. The intro is a bit of a text dump to setup who you are/the world... then the first ~10 minutes of gameplay is a tutorial/text dump further setting up the world. After that it is pretty much up to the player how they explore and if they want to choose dialogue options to get more flavor/info.

However, OP's sentiments come across as your typical "omfg I spent 5 minutes reading I want to play the game!1!!! I'm not a baby!!11!!"... then likely has no idea how to do certain things/what's going on. It really could be written better.

That doesn't mean it isn't valid. After all, some people don't care who/where they are... they just know they must kill/loot. Not to mention too much info/dump can be a major put-off to immersion/wanting to play... just as not enough info makes you not care.

(As an aside: Hollow Knight is vastly overrated, and this is coming from someone who 100%'ed it. The atmosphere is basically Dark Souls: A Bug's Life edition. Just as Salt and Sanctuary was Dark Souls: Paper Doll edition. Good games but not really unique/different.)

Say what you want about Hollow Knight, but truth is that game deals with introducing mechanics much better than just "my name is Ben Saxxon and combos work like this [explains for the next 50 seconds]". And the text dump is like... The laziest way to introduce a story. You use environment, you use dialogue, you use enemies or... Anything. In Hollow Knight there is plenty of reading. Charms are about reading. There are tens of NPCs that talk in reading. There are like statues that have descriptions on them. There are item descriptions.
The difference between Hollow Knight and Monster Sanctuary though is that those items are actually interesting.
And when I read the description of the stupid birds from the intro, it literally goes like...
"These old birds can live long and people keep them as hunting pets. Those who keep them are really cool, but apparently humans dont live as long as these long-living birds. So, long-living birds are kinda sad". OKAY, THANKS... GOOD TO KNOW THAT.
VERY INTERESTING.

[Gnocchi]

Fallout 3 sucks, though. If you're going to mention a game with a gripping narrative, at least bring up New Vegas.
Anyway, the focus of this game isn't on the story. It's a monster raising simulator crossed with a Metroidvania, so the emphasis is entirely on the gameplay, which happens to be really fun so far. The lovely music and graphics are a bonus, too.

[Singularity's Marauder]

Originally posted by Outsmarted By a Bethesda AI:

Fallout 3 sucks, though. If you're going to mention a game with a gripping narrative, at least bring up New Vegas.
Anyway, the focus of this game isn't on the story. It's a monster raising simulator crossed with a Metroidvania, so the emphasis is entirely on the gameplay, which happens to be really fun so far. The lovely music and graphics are a bonus, too.

People who think Fallout 3 is bad have never played a bad game in their life or simply haven't played Fallout 3 to appreciate it, but that is just my opinion. Although it's not as narratively strong as New Vegas, I feel like it still posses powerful moments such as the Tenpenny Tower or Tranquility Lane.
It is also fairly original for its times. I especially enjoyed Point Lookout, although I kinda hate Operation Anchorage for being a boring CoD rip-off, with some self-awareness.
New Vegas is definitly the most artistic of all the Fallout games, but I don't feel like Fallout 3 deserves the hate it usually gets.

[Gnocchi]

Fallout 3 gets the hate that it does because it doesn't understand Fallout in a meaningful capacity. The Tenpenny Tower and Tranquility Lane quests are actually a good example of that exact ineptitude, but I won't go too much into it. Suffice it to say, Fallout 3 is a bad Fallout game, and I say that having played it first, and then having moved on to 1 and 2 which I also love. 4 is definitely worse than 3 though.

In any case, off-topic to the point so I won't continue it.

[Singularity's Marauder]

Originally posted by Outsmarted By a Bethesda AI:

Fallout 3 gets the hate that it does because it doesn't understand Fallout in a meaningful capacity. The Tenpenny Tower and Tranquility Lane quests are actually a good example of that exact ineptitude, but I won't go too much into it. Suffice it to say, Fallout 3 is a bad Fallout game, and I say that having played it first, and then having moved on to 1 and 2 which I also love. 4 is definitely worse than 3 though.

In any case, off-topic to the point so I won't continue it.

aka. "i wont actually go into detail, because I'm too lazy and have not learned the important ability of explaining concepts to people that I believe in and rather expect someone else to do it"

[Gnocchi]

aka. I've discussed this exact topic for the entire decade and anyone who has participated in discussion on the topic has encountered the exact talking points that I would be articulating

In short, Fallout 3 fails to understand the gravitas of the post-apocalyptic world. It masquerades its ineptitude by creating 'wacky' situations and expecting the player to engage with its established faux-morality and cannot even deliver. Let's take Tenpenny Tower, for example. The quest prefaces itself by overtly establishing that Tenpenny and the residents of the tower are bigoted towards ghouls, or at least toward the group of ghouls living in the underground facility nearby. Besides the fact that it's a private property and they're well within their rights to deny entry, the game pushes you toward siding with the ghouls because it's the "good thing to do". I'll brush past the fact that Tenpenny Tower is located in the middle of nowhere, has no obvious water supply, lacks any crops or potential for farming and thus has no food supply outside of trade with Brahmin caravans or Megaton (who Tenpenny has no issue in blowing to pieces because it's an 'eyesore' and thus cannot be evidenced as a meaningful or necessary source of food/trade) and in general is an illogical location.
When you let the ghouls into Tenpenny Tower they slaughter everyone. Maybe some people were fooled by this and thought it 'subverted expectations' or that the people of Tenpenny Tower had this coming, but it isn't the case. Regardless, when you then rightfully kill these ghouls for their blatant act of terrorism, you receive negative karma. It's a case of the game's mechanics not living up to its supposed world-building/internal morality and it's an incredibly blatantly poorly written quest.
As for Tranquillity Lane, it's more of the same. Bethesda thinking that Fallout is about a 50s aesthetic and trying to imitate 'dark humour' whilst failing miserably. Honestly it's pathetic.