At this point, I think we can all confidently declare there are teams who make teams and those teams make games that the other teams also make. And at the same time, games by teams influence which teams make which games which influence what teams get put on which games, but also teams are on many games and many games influence both single and every team(s). It can be seen that there is a recursive, auto-looping, self-generating team-game and game-team paradigm at hand. We see game to teams which team to games and games to game but also team to teams and (team-to-team gives games) which generate (game-to-game gives teams). So we have team-to-game-to-game-to-team, and game-to-team-to-game-to-team, and team-to-team-team-to-game, etc. Most interesting is the {(team/game | game/team)-->audience} paradigm. We see in this discourse the foundation of "Death of the Team", which allows us to recursively deconstruct the construction of the audience-->(game | team) relation. Truly, the audience is outside of the team, but part of the game, which makes them an active non-member of the team, not-developing the ungame via a meta-discourse about the meta. At first it appears deeply confusing and almost like schizophrenic word-salad, but our examination reveals the almost child-like simplicity of the underlying meta-meta-relations within the discourse on games and teams.
Also I never thought this, but I have heard for years now that there was an A team and a B team. I find it comical that people keep denying this. I can think of a bunch of videos I watched in just the last 6 months that all mention an A team and a B team. It’s hilarious. Then you watch something like gamescon and Oh hey! For some reason the people on both the different teams are all here and on stage together… How Strange!? 😂
49:17 "you speak the truth and will show us when you come across it" so if you haven't found it yet then how do you know its true? I want to just take your word AS truth but i thought there needed to be empirical evidence in order to verify a claim...oh boy. what do i do iixxy??
Bill Parcells used to say "Dont tell me the process, show me the baby" I have zero Fs given to how Capcom structures their organization. All I care about is killing Monsters and making hats, Im thankful to all 3000 employees for making that possible. The only reason A/B team discussions exist is to validate opinions as to why one particular game is good and the other is bad when all someone has to say is "Sorry, I think that baby is ugly"
I might be missing the point of why this is such a big topic in the first place. I enjoy the games regardless. Apparently people care about this? They alternate types of game with every title, that's it lol.
I'm with you. Been playing since 4U and we never once cared what team made what. You get a new game you try it out and if you like it keep playing. I will say I got through Rise base game and enjoyed it but didn't go back for Sunbreak. They always learn great things from the previous titles.
This is it. I started with world and heard the same arguments about Rise when I first discovered Rise existed. Mostly to discourage playing it. Thankfully I decided to play it myself and enjoyed it infinitely more. @randomdude4505
I love how Kawkashi idiot called you out and said you were going to delete his comment and then you proceed to post a video addressing his comment during the video and showing his replies. Hilarious. He thought you actually were bothered so much by his invalid argument that you would hide the interaction. It’s hilarious.
I don't care about an a or b team, there are clearly 2 lines of Monster Hunter games, I've been playing 1000+ hours each game since MHF2 and it's just a fact, if they use the existence of those 2 lines to bash one or another, using a or b as an offense or as something negative, that's their problem, I enjoy both, and obviously I like one of those lines more, but that's my choice, why deny the obvious facts: there are 2 visions in the MH team.
Game Dev teams are a lot like theatre casts. Every show has a unique cast, even when there’s overlap, you almost never see a show performed with the exact same cast & crew in two different runs. A 2024 production of Hamlet is going to be VASTLY different from a 2015 one, but no one with two brain cells is going to say “A team shows are the only good ones, B team only makes crap.”
Absolutely terrible analogy. The MH teams aren't trying to make the same game. They make different game for different audiences with different design philosophies. Why would you compare game design to performers who are all reading from the same script? And really, anyone who enjoys sunbreak and GU but not tri and world "doesn't have two brain cells"? You're the one who doesn't have two brain cells. You can't even win an argument against your own strawman...
I use the 2 team argument and I recognize that sunbreak and GU are the best games in the series. World is not an anomaly. World is bad, but so was Dos and so was Tri. The "anomaly" is 4, which was made by the main team but is actually good. But it ceases to be an anomaly once you realize it was made for portable consoles and the portable team was also involved.
@@VocalSynthUtau So instead of using the argument to dunk on rise/the "portable" games you use it to dunk on the mainline games? You don't recognize that both versions of the argument are bad and don't make any sense? People are free to like what they like, I loved world, got 1.3K hours in it over these 6 years it's been out and I'm still playing it now but I was never able to get into rise, conversely I'm currently playing through GenU and enjoying it a lot, none of the games are objectively bad games, not even the very first one, they are all simply different.
44:30 this is common knowledge. You can look up articles from when 4 released, it was reported on even by western press. Also, it's pretty obvious by simple nature of the fact 4 was a mainline entry on a portable system. It also neatly explains why 4 was good when dos and tri weren't ...
!["สนธิ" ห่วงมีขบวนการปกป้อง "ทนายตั้ม" : [THE MESSAGE]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/2GQNp3EoMc0/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 85 | คู่เอก "ยอดเหล็กเพชร vs ผึ้งหลวง"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Qq_19bnnxEo/mqdefault.jpg)
At this point, I think we can all confidently declare there are teams who make teams and those teams make games that the other teams also make. And at the same time, games by teams influence which teams make which games which influence what teams get put on which games, but also teams are on many games and many games influence both single and every team(s). It can be seen that there is a recursive, auto-looping, self-generating team-game and game-team paradigm at hand. We see game to teams which team to games and games to game but also team to teams and (team-to-team gives games) which generate (game-to-game gives teams). So we have team-to-game-to-game-to-team, and game-to-team-to-game-to-team, and team-to-team-team-to-game, etc. Most interesting is the {(team/game | game/team)-->audience} paradigm. We see in this discourse the foundation of "Death of the Team", which allows us to recursively deconstruct the construction of the audience-->(game | team) relation. Truly, the audience is outside of the team, but part of the game, which makes them an active non-member of the team, not-developing the ungame via a meta-discourse about the meta. At first it appears deeply confusing and almost like schizophrenic word-salad, but our examination reveals the almost child-like simplicity of the underlying meta-meta-relations within the discourse on games and teams.
Also I never thought this, but I have heard for years now that there was an A team and a B team. I find it comical that people keep denying this. I can think of a bunch of videos I watched in just the last 6 months that all mention an A team and a B team. It’s hilarious. Then you watch something like gamescon and Oh hey! For some reason the people on both the different teams are all here and on stage together… How Strange!? 😂
I guess people on different teams can't share a stage together. this proves there are not two teams 🤔
49:17 "you speak the truth and will show us when you come across it" so if you haven't found it yet then how do you know its true? I want to just take your word AS truth but i thought there needed to be empirical evidence in order to verify a claim...oh boy. what do i do iixxy??
Bill Parcells used to say "Dont tell me the process, show me the baby"
I have zero Fs given to how Capcom structures their organization. All I care about is killing Monsters and making hats, Im thankful to all 3000 employees for making that possible.
The only reason A/B team discussions exist is to validate opinions as to why one particular game is good and the other is bad when all someone has to say is "Sorry, I think that baby is ugly"
I might be missing the point of why this is such a big topic in the first place. I enjoy the games regardless. Apparently people care about this? They alternate types of game with every title, that's it lol.
I'm with you. Been playing since 4U and we never once cared what team made what. You get a new game you try it out and if you like it keep playing. I will say I got through Rise base game and enjoyed it but didn't go back for Sunbreak. They always learn great things from the previous titles.
People use it as an excuse not to try Rise. Maybe other games too, but I only have personal experience with people making the argument for Rise.
@@randomdude4505 and it's moslty people who start with world who use it, such a big surprise
It's skub and anti-skub. That's it.
This is it. I started with world and heard the same arguments about Rise when I first discovered Rise existed.
Mostly to discourage playing it.
Thankfully I decided to play it myself and enjoyed it infinitely more.
@randomdude4505
I love how Kawkashi idiot called you out and said you were going to delete his comment and then you proceed to post a video addressing his comment during the video and showing his replies. Hilarious. He thought you actually were bothered so much by his invalid argument that you would hide the interaction. It’s hilarious.
I don't care about an a or b team, there are clearly 2 lines of Monster Hunter games, I've been playing 1000+ hours each game since MHF2 and it's just a fact, if they use the existence of those 2 lines to bash one or another, using a or b as an offense or as something negative, that's their problem, I enjoy both, and obviously I like one of those lines more, but that's my choice, why deny the obvious facts: there are 2 visions in the MH team.
I saw the gaijin comment, I even replied to it.
Game Dev teams are a lot like theatre casts. Every show has a unique cast, even when there’s overlap, you almost never see a show performed with the exact same cast & crew in two different runs. A 2024 production of Hamlet is going to be VASTLY different from a 2015 one, but no one with two brain cells is going to say “A team shows are the only good ones, B team only makes crap.”
Absolutely terrible analogy. The MH teams aren't trying to make the same game. They make different game for different audiences with different design philosophies. Why would you compare game design to performers who are all reading from the same script?
And really, anyone who enjoys sunbreak and GU but not tri and world "doesn't have two brain cells"? You're the one who doesn't have two brain cells. You can't even win an argument against your own strawman...
@@VocalSynthUtau You gotta be baiting, you've got 3 comments and they're each some of the most braindead things I've read all year
Havent i already watched this video?
Yes. This is the full version, all three parts combined into one.
i hate Gaijin Hunter, He's weird ass dude , similar to Rurikhan. they act like their the creators and developers of the monster hunter series
People use the 2 team argument to shit on rise because they like world better even though world is the anomaly of the series.
I use the 2 team argument and I recognize that sunbreak and GU are the best games in the series.
World is not an anomaly. World is bad, but so was Dos and so was Tri.
The "anomaly" is 4, which was made by the main team but is actually good. But it ceases to be an anomaly once you realize it was made for portable consoles and the portable team was also involved.
@@VocalSynthUtau So instead of using the argument to dunk on rise/the "portable" games you use it to dunk on the mainline games? You don't recognize that both versions of the argument are bad and don't make any sense? People are free to like what they like, I loved world, got 1.3K hours in it over these 6 years it's been out and I'm still playing it now but I was never able to get into rise, conversely I'm currently playing through GenU and enjoying it a lot, none of the games are objectively bad games, not even the very first one, they are all simply different.
44:30 this is common knowledge. You can look up articles from when 4 released, it was reported on even by western press.
Also, it's pretty obvious by simple nature of the fact 4 was a mainline entry on a portable system. It also neatly explains why 4 was good when dos and tri weren't ...