After ensuring that Monster Hunter: World for PlayStation 4 and Xbox One delivered on the proper MH experience, Capcom seems to have done a really poor job on the PC version, resulting in Tencent pulling it from WeGame gaming platform.
I must admit that for a company of Capcom's calibre, having Monster Hunter: World for PC taken down over customer complaints puts a seriously bad face on the company. Having it happen in less than a week makes it even worse but Tencent are dead set on ensuring WeGame's customers get the best of the best.
To make matters even worse and arguably extremely unprofessional, Capcom's rationale for launching Monster Hunter: World's PC version six months after the PS4 and Xbox One version was that they wanted to ensure it's properly polished. Now however, it seems as if they were busy counting them greenbacks from consoles.
Tencent issued a statement claiming that Monster Hunter: World has been taken down because the game doesn't entirely comply with relevant laws and regulations. Moreover, the company claims to have received a lot of negative reports on Capcom's game, all of which compounded to the takedown.
Monster Hunter: World is still available on Steam, although the reviews have dropped to mixed, due to a huge influx of negative reviews. A quick glance reveals that the game was plagued by sub-standard visuals and connection issues.
One user even quoted Capcom's statement, when they said "So, hopefully, PC users won’t mind waiting a little bit longer for us to bring you a really great optimised PC experience". Ironically enough, IGN's review states that "this beautifully implemented port is a perfect PC introduction to the joys of Monster Hunter". Beautifully. Implemented.
To make matters downright insulting for Capcom, prominent modder Kaldaien, the man who made Special-K graphics mods for NieR: Automata and Yakuza has already made a MH:W version of Special-K , which should help with the visuals.
He did however encounter issues with the game's anti-mod mechanisms, which he said are "always bad, but [they're] exponentially worse when done by amateurs who do not have the necessary experience to ensure their stupid charade doesn't do more harm to the customer than benefit (is there any?) to the publisher."