>>51358733>OW encounters do this better than random encounters because you can incorporate the enemies into the level design in specific ways instead of just having a shitty encounter after stepping x number of tiles.This doesn't have anything to do with puzzles or mazes, which is what this sentence is replying to. Think like SMT SJ, Nocturne, or Etrian Odyssey.
>OW encounters do this better than random encounters because you can place specific enemies in specific parts of the map instead of just hoping the player runs into the right encounters that require them to use their resources.What do you mean by "the right encounters?" All fights are an inherent risk. Unless you make certain encounter unavoidable, there's no risk because you can simply avoid them
>OW encounters do this better than random encounters since you can explicitly set the variety in the overworld instead of hoping the player doesn't just run into zubat 5 times in a row instead of seeing anything elseThere's no way you'd have the space in a level to realistically place more than a handful of enemies while programming their idle behaviors in any way that isn't immersion breaking. MMOs are notorious for this, just speckling enemies that patrol a small radius. Also, the issue of 5 zubats is a problem with the selection of encounters, not the principle of random encounters as a whole. Look at XY, each route is pretty jammed packed with Pokemon
>OW encounters do this better than random encounters because you can set OW encounters to aggro on the player instead of just hoping the player procs a random encounter.Again, what's the risk if you can avoid them, for example by giving them a wide berth? Unless you're suggesting every encounter can outrun the player, which doesn't really function much different than random encounters. I fail to see why it would be objectively better.
Not really seeing how either is objectively better than the other. As I said before, each has strengths and weaknesses.
