Okay, can I just say something that I've been thinking about for a while? The comparisons between Zelda and Xenoblade Chronicles 2 are way too grounded in basic fundamentals that barely shape the actual games themselves and thus seem like huge leaps in logic when frame in such a basic fashion. When you just say "Xenoblade Chronicles is the next fix for fans of Zelda BOTW" or "Xenoblade is the game for those Zelda fans after BOTW" or anything of that nature, you are breaking down the games to such a degree that they seem more similar than they most likely are. Like, literally the only similarity is that they're open world and they're both made by Nintendo.
If people added addendums to these statements or explained that they were only talking about the open world aspect exclusively it would be fine, but I've even seen people talk about them both as RPGs. As someone who is not into the Xeno games, am I wrong about this, or are the comparisons a little bit short-sighted?
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
