Monster Hunter Wilds' story is as divisive as expected: some players hate the "relentless on rails handholding," others love the build-up to "the best scene in Monster Hunter history"

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.

Case in point: this red-hot post from Reddit user Ruminatingsoule, who argues that "the relentless on rails handholding in story mode is absolutely [ridiculous]." They point to the many fixed walking sections which introduce new areas and prevent you from wandering too far from your posse of NPCs, lest you delay the carefully timed introduction of monsters or environmental details. There's an argument to be made for using these sections to guide players through the world, but it can feel like Wilds yanks on your leash right as you're about to pounce on something fun.

"Did the developers seriously think people wanted this? They are treating the player base like incompetent children," adds Ruminatingsoule, ruminating soulfully. "LET ME PLAY THE GAME, FOOLS."

"I have definitely had a few moments where I just rolled my eyes cause I walked 5 feet away from the path it wanted and it rubber banded me back to the intended path or wouldn't let me hunt a monster I wanted to hunt," agrees tazmaniandevil1210.

"Rockstar vibes," says Kourtos, in one of the most incisive critiques in the thread.

Chimwizlet raises another point: "I don't understand how a series that used to be famously bad for giving players little to no direction has somehow got to the point of doing the exact opposite and not letting the player just play the game." (I don't understand how a co-op game keeps flubbing co-op systems so hard after 20 years, but here we are.)

Many other posts have argued a similar point and likewise become community water coolers. "I get that the game director says he wanted to focus on an ecosystem, but it should be up to me to do the exploring and to discover that ecosystem, not to have NPCs slowly walking through maps pointing crap out to me like I'm a child on some safari," says Cannibal_Yak. "The way they handled the story makes this game feel restrictive," echoes minev1128. Another player expressed their exhaustion over spending 10+ minutes traipsing through environments only to spend just a few minutes actually fighting a new monster.

That being said, plenty of people demonstrably liked Monster Hunter Wilds' story. Players in one 8,900-upvote post from story enjoyer Monkey_With_Tankard, who is presumably a Congalala, praise the game's focus on tangible dangers and local concerns, buckets of new lore filling in large gaps in the Monster Hunter library, gorgeous and plentiful cutscenes, and an appropriate mix of lighthearted and serious moments. Core companions like Alma and Gemma are well-liked (much more than Monster Hunter World's Handler), side characters like Rove and Olivia can steal the show, and our hunter in particular has a measurable impact on the story. But here again, some fans may say "my only complaint is the forced railroading."

Link spoiler warning: The sheer charisma of the player character has been a high point for many, myself included. Bwub2 celebrates "the Pure 'Him' energy Wilds gives your character." Evelynn_cretoxyrhina calls the low rank finale "THE hardest hunter cutscene," while kennydevin says it's "the best scene in Monster Hunter history." The community is flush with similar positivity. If nothing else, folks seem to agree that Wilds has a heck of a finale.

I followed similar discussions after the release of Monster Hunter World, and looking at the critical and community consensus for Wilds, my overall read of the narrative reception is this: pretty good but inelegant. It's better than World, probably the best in the whole series, and consistently visually stunning, but it can feel like gameplay and storytelling butt heads instead of complementing each other.

That said, the fact that these conversations are even happening, whereas we previously would've collectively shrugged our shoulders and said "I don't know, we hunted monsters I guess" in any reflection on a Monster Hunter game's story, shows that Wilds has moved the series forward in some ways.

An Iceborne-style Master Rank expansion for Wilds looks more inevitable than ever after the game set a Capcom record by selling 8 million copies in three days. If the campaign experience in that expansion can better combine the superb gameplay, likable characters, gorgeous biomes, and interesting themes of Wilds, the next batch of narrative discourse could be more universally positive.

Capcom promises "this is just the start for the next generation of Monster Hunter" as Wilds shatters sales milestones: "The Guild authorizes this celebration!"