i don't know what your definition of epic is but i'll try to give mine for better understanding. and to make it easy and not too timeconsuming let me state a passage of a xenosaga 3 review that pretty much says what a mean:

"The initial hours of the game, and we definitely mean hours, will strike you down with a barrage of information that you’re hopefully looking forward to. If not, prepare to get blindsided by its sheer volume, and it’s not just Episode III. It’s extenuated by the Database, which helps detail the backstory and the passage of time between the second and third games and just about everything else you could ever want to know within the Xenosaga world. It’s also been upgraded to allow for more accessibility and comprehension with the inclusion of illustrations. The downside to this is if you aren’t willing to be fully immersed in this tome of reference then you’ll miss out on the plot’s finer details. And even if you are, the constant need to check this reference detracts from the scope of the story. With that out of the way, the story has over eight hours of voice-acted cutscenes. To say the game is story heavy is an overwhelming understatement, but it by no means has a negative impact on the game, and is what we’ve come to expect from the series."

now compared to that xenoblade certainly is a downgrade in complexity and depth. and from what i've seen from the x trailers so far, i fear that this game will be another downgrade compared to xenoblade.

Errr...as someone who has played and loved both Xenoblade and Monster Hunter tri, I really don't see the comparisons.

The battle system in Monster Hunter essentially has different buttons to press for different types of attacks. There is also a large focus on where you hit the monster you are fighting (cutting off the tail etc) and avoiding their attacks.

In Xenoblade, standard attacks are automatic and you use the bar at the bottom of the screen to select specific attacks which often have some sort of status effect attached or positional advantage (attack from the side to inflict slow for instance). These attacks all have a cooldown and you often have to work with your party members to climb up the chain of status effects (ex. you inflict Break which allows another move to inflict Topple which allows another move to inflict daze).

Additionally, nearly every other part of the game is very different from the leveling to the exploration to the story to the equipment etc...literally the only similarity I see is that in both games you fight large monsters...

I have played Monster Hunter back on the PSP and various other hunting games.  I know what kind of game Monster Hunter and it's ilk are.  I don't need you to elaborate. I have not played Xenoblade. Just the earlier Xeno games. 

They LOOK the same. Slow and boring fighting with large monsters (Mechs are new though).  If they show something that looks substantially different I may change  my opinion. It's wonderful that you and your friends seem to think you know exactly what the game will be. Irrespective of your "expertise" I will take the time to reveiw the footage and once again come to my own conclusion. 

Placing attacks with positional advantages and disadvantages and working with your party members to topple large foes sounds ALOT like hunting games to me. So maybe it's best to say we have differing opinions and I'll wait for more footage to sway mine.    If they show more of that other stuff I'll definitely take it into consideration.  

Not Xenoblade. Xenogears and saga.  I have made no assumption except what the game looks like to me which is Monster Hunter with Mechs.  So once again thank you for your opinion and assumptions as well but they wont be making me change mine. Only more footage or someone whom has played X and not the tons of games it looks similar to will do that.  

Nope. Looked generic and typical been-there-done-that.

Generic, typical been-there-done-that's don't run up $200 used copies or RPG of the generation accolades from gamers.

So why have I never heard of it until now?