A survival horror about dinosaurs can’t exist because an action game that includes fantasy dinosaur-like creatures does?
That sounds like saying you wouldn’t have space for Resident Evil because of Fallout, and those arguably have more overlap than Dino Crisis and Monster Hunter in their settings.
I mean I could be wrong, I haven’t played Dino Crisis (though I intend to at some point), but from what I know and have heard it’s not that close to Monster Hunter. People have been looking for AAA Dino horror-type stuff for ages. They wouldn’t bring up Dino Crisis instead of Monster Hunter in those discussions if they filled the same niche.
If anything, you could leverage your art asset pipeline to make another game with dinosaurs in it more cheaply. I’m sure as hell not going to be a Monster Hunter customer, but I certainly could be for Dino Crisis.
It would be more appropriate to say Dino Crisis is unnecessary because Resident Evil exists.
I know Mikami is in a good position to understand these decisions better than us, but this still feels like a cop-out answer. I suspect there is far more to it than a terrible comparison to Monster Hunter.
This seems like a throw away hand waive statement. Like he didn’t have anything prepared to say and this was his first thought.
Monster Hunter is quite literally the exact opposite kind of game that Dino Crisis is.
Fingers crossed for an unannounced demo that’s just one saurian in a small maze, hunting you as much as you’re hunting it. Replay it enough and it fades out to a trailer: Dino Crises.
