Our Monster Hunter Wilds review gives the game high marks for its impeccable combat, a colorful variety of monsters, and some smart quality-of-life wins, but Wilds also arguably has the best narrative in the series (and I would argue it does). The presentation of that narrative, however, can be cumbersome, predictable, and outright stupid at times. I ended up enjoying it in the end, partly thanks to visual splendor and a guiding theme of man vs. nature, but it's such a huge departure from the hands-off approach that Monster Hunter is known for that I'm not surprised to see player opinion divided now that the game is out and folks are finishing the campaign.
I've been monitoring discussions around other reviews and various player communities for the past few days, and it seems that Monster Hunter Wilds players have generally split into two views on the narrative. It's either a refreshingly hands-on examination of the Hunter's Guild that gives our hunter some real power and personality in the story, or it's a tedious and overwrought obstruction to the real reason we're playing this game. There's obviously a gradient of opinions here and these two arguments aren't mutually exclusive, but these feel like the two extremes of that gradient, and that's what I want to examine.
