If I recall correctly, there was an Iwata Asks featuring Hironobu Sakaguchi and Tetsuya Takahashi concerning the development of Xenoblade and Last Story and indicators were there that Takahashi has considerable influence on the story and pretty much all other aspects of the game.  Same with Xenoblade Chronicles X.  He definitely strikes me as an auteur, someone whose vission is core to and drives nearly every aspect of the work.

And also consider this: the trailers are being that blatant but they haven't shown a single story scene, not even the opening one, in its entirety yet.  So they are being quite cagey with plot specifics.  Also, another thing to keep in mind is The Quest plotline structure can lend itself to very engaging stories depending on how the nature of The Quest changes and what path it carves through the world.  See Lord of the Rings as an example.

For me, it's just sad knowing I'm going into this game based solely on the name. It it were anything else besides Xenoblade I'd skip it, not might or maybe, I WOULD skip it even though Monolith Soft maade it. That's not really the way you want to release games, because if it is not all it's cracked up to be you're going to have people jumpimg ship or at least more hesitant of buying the next game or if this is peoples first Monolith Soft game, can put them off this developer entirely.. But as of right now for me they are 2 for 2. Both Blade and Blade X are masterpieces, I just wish it looked like this one was as well but instead I find myself thinking "well, this doesn't look good, but it is my favorite series so...." 

Other than from a few people on this forum, the reception to the game seems to be quite positive from what I've seen. I was just watching Easy Allies' reaction to the entire direct and a few of them mentioned that Xenoblade looks like it could go mainstream with this game, and that Monolith Soft seems to be trying quite hard to make that happen. They were positive about everything except the lack of information on the story, but are confident the story will be good. Similar reactions can be found all across YouTube. Much of the early skepticism seems to have faded with the direct. 

The negative reaction seems to be limited to some more ardent fans of the series who might be disappointed in the slight tone shift from Xenoblade Chronicles X. I can understand that. I would have prefered X-2 to be a priority, especially since I was invested in seeing that story completed, but don't understimate the overall appeal this game could have. 

Going main stream isn't always a good thing, and ignoring the issues by saying "eveyone's cool with it I seen" doesn't really solve the issues. I even know some of these are my personal dislikes and don't translate over to mainstream thought. The thing is though is that it still is a game muddled by iffy voice acting work, with pretty dated looking graphics for Switch, with a story that obviously isn't striking the right cords with people, and an art style/animations that seem a step back for the series character wise. And the only response to this skepticism is "Oh, it's Monolith Soft". Well yeah, I love Monolith Soft too but that changes nothing.

I think you are being too generous to past Xeno titles to be honest. All Xeno titles (from Xenogears until Xenoblade Chronicles X) have had some pretty bad voice-acting. The exception was Xenoblade Chronicles, but even Shulk's "fiooooraaaaaaaaaaa" gave me a few eye-rolls now and then, and I played the game mostly on the Japanese dub because of it. If I heard "fiooooraaaaa" out of context I probably would've felt the same as you do now with the voices in this trailer. Bad dubs are standard fare in JRPG's, and the worst of Xenoblade 2 are average for the JRPG genre, and the better ones above-average. 

The graphics are technically more impressive than anything Monolith Soft has worked on, besides Breath of the Wild. This is clear even with the low quality images/videos we have to work with. The environments are just as large an expansive as anything in Chronicles or X, except it takes the world design of Chronicles (separate zones) rather than X(seamless open-world.) That it isn't pushing the Switch likely has more to do with its quick release than anything. I personally am fine with the graphics, and would prefer the game release two years sooner as it is, than Monolith Soft wasting time on building a new Switch optimized game engine. Especially since I suspect that they'll be working on XCX2 after this for the Switch. One of the reasons why Xenoblade Chronicles X took so long was because they had to build their propreitary engine, which they are now using for Xenoblade 2 (and other sequels.) Nevertheless, there are quite a few upgrades over X and the game just had a visual boost since E3, so they are definitely not done optimizing. 

I am personally not bothered by the art-style. The battle animations seem pretty standard fare for a Xenoblade game. Since it isn't an action-RPG I don't prioritize it as much. 

What I care about in a Xenoblade game, first and foremost, is the story, then the exploration/music, then the battle system. So far all of those are constants from X, it seems. 

I guess my expectations weren't as high as yours. The Switch (in handheld mode) is a marginal upgrade over the Wii U. One shouldn't have expected a Xenoblade --> Xenoblade Chronicles X level of difference in how the game looks and plays, and what gains we do see are consistent with what the Switch is with respect to the Wii U. 

Essentially, I guess not, or my expectations were too high. The original Blade and X had spoiled me and this was just not going to live up to the task. I would also prefer they get on with X, and would rather them push this out and really spend the time perfecting there new grand space epic, which hopefully they are doing as I know they got a new game coming out, but they have also expanded a lot, so time will tell. As for the voice acting, I even linked where Xenosaga 2 was notorious for having terrible voice acting. However, Blade (original) may have had a iffy line or two, but was mostly rock solid, same as X. Gears barely had any voice acting, so it gets a pass.

As far as graphics, I would say Odyssey also trumps it, as well as Splatoon 2. It just seems like a lower rung from where X had left us. as far as animations, their run animations are not that pleasant to look at, lol. 

One thing that is not a constant from Blade or X seems to be armor customizations. And let's face it that sucks. Even if your fine with the outfits, that's essentially an option taken away from us. But who knows, someone said they seen an icon that may just be an armor shop. I really doubt it though as they haven't shown a different piece of armor yet with a few actual playthroughs under the belt. Time will tell. 

The problem with ports is that, when they arrive, if not really close to the original release date, most of the sales have been done.
When Wolfenstein 2 arrives the game will have released on 2 platforms for at least 2 months and has seen an holiday period.

I say at least 2 months, but it's probably a few more months.

It is important how you start, but history showed that that it isn't enough. What matters is how move along.
And in that regard, yes, Switch has had a great year (great, innovative concept + several system sellers). But that is 2017.
We know very little of 2018; we have no real idea if Switch's success is enough to warrant better 3rd party support next year and beyond.

Actually, the hardest tests (if 3rd party games can sell well) are yet to arrive: Fifa 18, NBA 18, Skyrim, Doom.
If these games sell well enough you can bet that instead of ports we will get multiports, but if sales aren't that great (not the same as bad), we might just keep getting ports after ports.

I know there's time to announce more games, i just find it strange that they chose to start announcing games that are coming in (at least) late March and not in January, February.
It's the order of reveals that i found odd.
It's nothing big, just... strange.

3 Thanks to the release date of Xenoblade chrnonicles 2 otherwise it would have been a 2.
No release date for The champion's ballad. No footage for Fire emblem Switch and Shin megami tensei 5 (both announced back in January). No Level 5 games for Switch, no Xenoblade chrnonicles X port nor Bayonetta or other Platinum games stuff (Shitty Kamiya who retwitted the direct.... :/).
They just reshowed the game already announced plus Doom and Wolfenstein 2 which i don't care about, especially on Switch. Hope Nintendo will push harder on new, good, games instead of port old games on Switch. As of now it's too focuse on port Skyrim, Doom, Rocket league as they are new releases when the majority of gamers just consumed their blu-ray and want something different.
Oh yeah, not a word about virtual console and online subscription (and the free games with the subscription).

Again, clear fact is that Wolfenstein 2 announcement is announcement of new game, not announcement of port/remaster of some old game, fact that will come later to Switch doesnt change that fact.

Actual history tells us that only console that started strong and failed is Sega Dreamcast, but that much more has with that how Sega didn't had any money to continue supporting Dreamcast than anything else. Switch actually started stronger than Dreamcast and we know that Nintendo is full of money. If Switch has great 1st year, there are very high chances that will have strong other years, because Switch with every new game is becoming more and more attractive platform, also again, it's much easier to continue momentum than need to save platform. And Switch is becoming only platform that Nintendo will suport, so you dont have any reason to suspect they will drop Switch succes. We actualy seeing that contine great sales of Switch and raising of Switch instal base direclty means better 3rd party support, how time is passing we will have more and more 3rd party support, and definitely much more 3rd party anancument for next year then we had this, because plenty of 3rd party with Switchafter Wii U taked "wait and see aprouch".

Those game will sell OK because they have extra value and offer full handheld mode compared to PS4/XB1/PC version of games, and thats why for instance Bethesda is relasing Skyrim, Doom and Wolfenstein 2.

Again, it can only be strange if you totally ignoring what Nintendo is doing in recent times and espacily with Switch, where they are focusing on games that will be out soon.

"fact that will come later to Switch doesnt change that fact."

In terms of sales it doesn't change the big picture. Why? Because most of it's sales will be done on the available versins.
When the Switch version arrives, it won't matter if it was announced after or before the game came out. What will matters is: who else is there that hasn't got the game?

This is the problem with getting a late port.

You could also use the PS3's start to show that being 3rd at the beggining of your lifecycle, doesn't mean you'll be stuck there.
Or, from another point of view. XB360 was for most of it's lifetime, ahead of the PS3, yet, it lost that position.
So, i say that, it doesn't really matter how you start. What matters is how you keep momentum or even increase it.

"And Switch is becoming only platform that Nintendo will suport, so you dont have any reason to suspect they will drop Switch succes."
First, you are assuming that there's no 3DS successor in the works, as of now, or that they won't start developing games for it in 2018, for example.
Second, assuming that they will only Switch to support in the coming years... there's two things that need to be said about it: a) it's not just a matter of quantity. You also need to create/bring system sellers, otherwise you risk increasing your userbase by a little (mostly giving your current users what to buy, instead of strongly creating more consumers);  b) rumor has it that Nintendo is now focusing more on big games. Which could lead to not so many games, as we both expect.

"raising of Switch instal base direclty means better 3rd party support"
Wii did that. Did it get better 3rd party support? No.
What will count is who Switch's userbase is: is it your old Nintendo fans who don't really care about 3rd party games or is it being made of Sony and MS owners  - who are willing to buy an "inferior" version for the sake of portability.
Only time will tell and that is why i said Switch's biggest tests are still to come.

Even if they have extra value (Fifa 18 is actually missing content, btw) and offer portability, not everyone is willing to rebuy the game or buy it on Switch instead of PS4/XB1, just because it's portable. It's adds a great value to the Switch version, but...

You're still not getting Miyamotoo.
Revealing your January, February and March games first - than those coming in Spring - in no way invalidates Nintendo's way of announcing games for the short term or long term.
It's about them revealing, for example, a March/April game, and not a January or February game.

In other words, it's the order of announcements for the short term period that i found strange.