>>46369469>The game has always been progression based.that's pretty much every game in existence anon
>Relegating the entire world to one field that you have full access to at the start completely defeats the point.aside from the incessant hyperbole and the fact that there is no information aside from a trailer, there is no reason to think that there won't still be bosses and areas to unlock. You're being overly dramatic
>Once I've wandered from one end of the map to the other and caught my chosen team in the first 5 minutesagain with the hyperbole, it's like your making up your own little greek tragedy here.
>Follow the main plot? How is that any different to the regular railroading?because it brings non-linearity to the table. The ability to tackle different objectives (whether they are divine beasts or gyms or dungeons or bosses or quests or whatever) in different order, allowing the player to shape up their own playthrough with more freedom, like an actual adventure.
>The game might let you be free to do anything you want, but in Pokemon there's only one or two things to do anyway, so what's the point?are you just railing against the franchise in general here?
>We still don't even know what the gameplay is actually gonna be, and none of the people vehemently defending open world shit ITT can even explain what they like about it.you realise this applies to you as well right?
I think the idea of an open map fits pokemon well. Many of the things people clamour aboud (following pokemon, rides, multiplayer, no railroading, snapping, proper scaling, camping) are all just begging to be implemented in such a format, which would be harder to implement in the traditional format without making some awkward compromises (like SM's riding and snapping mechanics)
>What do you actually DO in this game?again, it sounds like you're having an existential crisis here more than anything. I'm sure they will figure something out, there's plenty of potential
