>>45473069>Nope, both of those games are completely unplayable due to it being just one big guided tour.Non-linearity on paper isn't bad but the way gamefreak implemented it in gens 1-3 was crappy because you can do gyms out of order but the gym leaders never get their levels to be scaled with the player's. Alola and Galar might have linear story progression but at least had a good variety of mons you can catch in game, unlike gen 1 and LGPE, which imo makes for better replayability than doing gyms out of order. If the game is going to be piss easy I would at least like to have a large pool of mons available at my disposal.
> it has actual dungeons and varied routes.How are Alola's routes worse than Kanto's routes? Perhaps I'll concede on the dungeons part, mainly because mount lanakila was weak for a victory road, but a lot of Alola's routes had paths leading to optional locations (sandy cave, hau'oli cemetery, kala'e bay, hano beach, etc.). Also, despite mount lanakila being shit I think TRR castle and haina desert at least were pretty good dungeons
>Also a "battle tower" is still nothing. I can just play that in any of the better games that came before it.Not really. certain mons like Masquerain, Pelipper, Bellossom, and Corsola get stat buffs or new moves or abilities that they don't have in gen 6 and before, so there's still a reason for me to play battle tree
