| the_dengle said: "Massive open world" does not imply free camera control, literally the only difference involving the world between the latest iterations and the game you envision. Check wikipedia: "An open world is a level or game designed as a nonlinear, vast open area with many ways to reach an objective." Pokemon is currently too linear to meet this definition, but if you could battle the gym leaders in any order to reach the objective of the Pokemon League, it would indeed be a massive open world game. If you like Pokemon being annualized then we agree on less than I thought. Aonuma also had to address fans pestering him about Majora's Mask, despite it being among the least-popular console Zelda games. A vocal minority will do that. They will also convince themselves that they are not a minority at all. I don't even understand why this is your favorite franchise. You don't seem to actually like anything about it. |
"Massive open world," by my definition, does. I know what an open world is. I don't need wikipedia, and frankly if it's definition doesn't include Xenoblade, it's wrong.
There is a clear and distinct difference between Xenoblade's open world and Pokemon's open world. I want that difference gone. Xenoblade's is massive in real scale. Pokemon's is massive in implied scale. Same with Zelda 1 vs Zelda U. Zelda one is massive in its implied scale. Zelda U is massive in its real world scale. Pokemon is massive in it's implied scale. I want a Pokemon that's massive in it's real world scale. Call that whatever you wan't. I don't care. That's what I, and everyone else who has brought this up, wants.
The audience that wants a massive open world Pokemon is far larger and far louder than the fans asking for a MM remake. They aren't even comparable.
I'm not going to humor you. I don't need to defend my affection for Pokemon. You mistake focused criticism with broad dislike.
