While It’s Silly to Criticize Monster Hunter Campaigns, Wild’s Feels Like a Step Down from World’s

I’m relatively new to the Monster Hunter franchise. For years, I avoided these games since they were primarily available on portable consoles that didn’t interest me, and, honestly, the graphics looked subpar at best.

It wasn’t until Monster Hunter World came along that I got hooked, falling in love with the series and becoming an avid fan. At the time I’m writing this, I’ve invested over two dozen hours into Monster Hunter Wilds, focusing on the main campaign first before diving into the sidequests. However, the main storyline was quite a disappointment.

Typically, Monster Hunter campaigns aren’t praised for their storytelling or intricate plots. They’re more about easing you into the game’s vast array of systems and mechanics, preparing you for the numerous hours you’re about to spend hunting. Campaigns usually serve as a grand tour of the varied monsters you’ll encounter.

Here’s the usual setup: your group is tracking a mysterious creature causing disturbances across various areas. You face interruptions from other beasts along the way until the source of the initial turmoil becomes clear. Eventually, you confront the major foe, the campaign wraps up, and then you’re ushered into High Rank, where the real Monster Hunter experience begins.

On a general note, Wilds follows this formula, similar to World. But the devil is in the details, and these differences can greatly affect whether a campaign feels adventurous or falls flat.

The campaign of Monster Hunter World had a captivating drive. Introducing Zorah Magdaros, a massive creature that required an entire community to slow down, was intriguing. It’s so enormous that battling multiple monsters on its back still left room for more.

This ambitious move was part of an attempt to introduce a new type of encounter in the series. Although many players weren’t fans, with gameplay involving setting up fortifications and loading cannons, which deviates from traditional hunting, I appreciated these segments. They broke the repetitive rhythm of battling monster after monster, using Zorah’s world journey to propel the narrative forward.

Each time Zorah advanced into a new area, you’d unlock that section of the map to explore and witness the ecological impact firsthand. The game kept its cards close about the real reason behind Zorah’s migration, adding urgency and mystery to the chase.

Contrast this with Wilds, which lacks a Zorah or a major looming menace. Instead, the game features Arkveld, a flagship monster that makes sporadic appearances without clear explanation before disappearing for long stretches. It’s not even the final adversary; that title belongs to a dormant giant you’re barely aware of until right before the battle.

There’s no sense of different factions uniting against a mutual threat. Some monster introductions in Wilds feel shoehorned into missions without smooth integration. It’s almost as if Capcom couldn’t find a natural place for them in the campaign.

It seems like something was cut that once linked the various character storylines. Some NPC dialogues and cinematic moments hint at a deeper story, yet we never see it unfold. The narrative about the forerunner civilization and their disastrous weather technology ultimately becomes just another tale scattered across cutscenes, more suited for a lore book.

In essence, Wilds’ campaign illustrates the broader issues with the game. It attempts to increase accessibility by smoothing out charm and character, but perhaps those weren’t the right areas to focus on.

Soon enough, the main campaign of Wilds might fade from memory as the game’s successes and failures take center stage. However, I can’t help but wonder what a true sequel to World’s campaign might have offered.