This
The open world is genuinely a good thing. Now all that's left is making a GOOD open world since SV is unironically the most depressing shit I've ever seen.
Are TMs, some """rare""" items and those fricking useless coins and chests the only reason to explore this shitty overworld? Shit couldn't be any more bland
>Are TMs, some """rare""" items and those fricking useless coins and chests the only reason to explore this shitty overworld?
The primary reason is to find new pokemon. After that, it's to find the stakes to unlock the legendaries.
I really liked it but I got the movement abilities bar glide first thing so I probably had a different experience than you did.
I got all of the movement abilities before the 3rd gym and I still hated it. In fact, it bored me even harder. When you move so goddamn fast in a bland overworld, every location feels the exact same shit. At least when walking you get to figure out which one is the best path and end up appreciating the world a little more
I pretty much spent the remaining part of the game rushing from one place to the other while climbing and gliding through everything
I'm having similar problems. Something about it is just kind of boring me and I love both Pokemon and open world games.
The clusterfrick of Pokemon just spawning all around you and forcing you into battle gets so annoying. Funny because people complained about being forced to battle trainers before, but this feels so much worse. Hunting for TM material really isn't appealing especially with how long they've been infinite use. This seems out of place canonically and mechanically. Crafting is great, but not for just TMs.
>Are TMs, some """rare""" items and those fricking useless coins and chests the only reason to explore this shitty overworld? Shit couldn't be any more bland
what did you honestly expect? EVERY open world game is like that.
No, grid-based game design is outdated and unpopular. As you've seen in BDSP they can't even make it work properly with analog movement and 3D models. It's unnatural, restrictive, and not credible any more from a worldbuilding perspective.
Absolutely not, the problem with BPSD was not that, but the chibi design of the NPCs, the total absence of Platinum content and the fact that the game is literally Diamond and Pearl without adding anything new!
>the problem with BPSD was not that
Wrong: there are a lot of problems with BDSP and this is undeniably one of them. They struggled so hard to implement free movement in a grid-based restrictive overworked that the player character routinely gets stuck on objects or fails to navigate narrow ledges.
The grids are a vestige of outdated game design and do not work with modern controls.
It's a bad game design specifically for modern Pokemon games because it can't be easily paired with free analog movement.
Previous games in the series that used 90 degree grids did so because of hardware limitations. Now that those limitations no longer exist, customers will not accept the same restrictions arbitrarily. You are thinking purely from a nostalgic standpoint.
It would be enough to widen the road below the climb, the fault lies with the laziness of ILCA which limited itself to copy and paste the DP code in the realization of that cave, not of the game design.
>The grids are a vestige of outdated game design and do not work with modern controls.
Not even, grids are fine, but this will happen if you try playing with a joystick instead of the D-Pad like you're supposed to on a grid game.
>the total absence of Platinum content
Wrong. BDSP does have Platinum content. >and the fact that the game is literally Diamond and Pearl without adding anything new
Wrong. BDSP does have new content.
I don't completely agree. Something is definitely of with S/V on top of all its technical problems.
Legends Arceus seemed so much better, far less buggy, and much more stable. It may have less overall to do, but something about the movement and the theme feels much more natural to the pokemon world.
I do prefer the semi linear structure of the original 2 generations with optional dungeons/challenges along the way though.
True, it was more of a large zones type structure, but clearly they were going for the openworld style with how large each area was and the absence of routes.
It definitely seemed like a test run an actual open world game.
Pokemon attacking you in overworld are missing.
I will never forget how I entered bravely the abomasnow outbteak as I had 2 fire pokemon but then I got my ass wipes by blizzards before I even started battles.
>grid
no lol >hallways
Yes, make routes iconic again istead of being a big blob of wide useless area.
Alola was mostly nice (dunno about S/S, didn't get to play those) and I wish we got an upgrade from there istead of openworld
>The Pokémon franchise is going in the wrong direction!
I agree, but not because of the open world.
Open world, open map, hallway routes, I don't mind any of them as long as they're done well and filled with proper challenges. PLA & SV's worlds are ugly, barren, and unremarkable.
SV also has bosses that don't have level scaling on either side making the ability to go to any of them in any order almost pointless if you start on a mid or end game level boss then just steamroll the rest below it. Most frustratingly, this has been done before in the series. Multiplayer depending on the game can either lower overleveled Pokémon to the set level and the Gym Leader Castle in the Stadium series has the opponents' levels scaled to that of your highest leveled Pokémon if it's above 50.
For me, what's making Pokémon go in the wrong direction is the art direction where style and character designs are an inconsistent eyesore, the music which is nauseating, repetitive, and even more incoherent than the art, and the gameplay where it's a constant tug-o-war over what can carry over, what gets improved, what gets worsened, and what gets removed entirely along with the lack of difficulty and variation of what does remain of it.
Actually correct, Pokemon games are shat out every single year; that's a massive open world being made over and over. The games were absolutely dogshit on 3DS, and Switch games are noticably lacking compared to others. How long can GameFreak keep up? Next gen console where the standard is raised, while even more development is spent on a mostly empty open world.
Getting rid of the grid is fine, but yes, open worlds are a cancerous tumor on gaming and a disaster for every game that tries them. >inb4 "They're not bad, they just haven't been done right!"
This excuse is used for every bad idea.
Real openworld pokemon could be fun
But this current half-assed semi-linear shitfest without any real feeling of exploration is awful
Gamefreak is not skilled enough to pull of BotW but with pokemon
Open world game design is hard and 90% of devs can't make it work in a way that actually benefits the gameplay. GF could barely even make linear game design work well, and considering how lazy and corner cutting they are, they should stick to more basic linear world design since it suits their limitations more. The best parts of SWSH were the linear routes and towns.
God no, if something this is what the series needed, what we need now is bigger and more detailed region (example, forests FORESTS), SV convinced me that this was the right direction, not perfect but this game and Arceus needs to be the foundation for the franchise onwards.
I normally agree that Open world is cancer, but on this particular situation I disagree.
It doesn't matter which direction the games are heading, GF will still frick it up. Yes it's fun to think that GF will make the open world actually good, but they won't. It's better to be realistic about GF and accept their limitations instead of actually thinking they'll improve with time.
If we get another game with these hideous human designs I'm dropping it allthogether, there's not a single design that is actually passable, I can forgive the Pokemon because they are hit an miss and grow in you but the characters... fricking hell both MCs and La Primera are fricking abominations.
Nope, the opposite. You're what's killing the franchise
What's ruining Pokemon isn't the game design, it's the lack of polish in these games.
A thousand poorly executed ideas thrown together to meet deadlines. An Open World Pokemon game could be great...if there was level scaling with trainers and things to do beside battling and cathcing
Non Battle interactions with Pokemon could be great....if the only other option wasn't just throwing Pokeballs.
Pokemon's weakness is that it tries to do too much while not making sure it does anyhing super well. Jack of all Trades style game design
Theclack of polish, AND THE GAME DESIGN!!! Stupid.
t. yawning homosexual
Anon, just stop. I don't even know wtf you're on about, stop being a stupid homosexual
What's ruining Pokemon isn't the game design, it's the lack of polish in these games.
A thousand poorly executed ideas thrown together to meet deadlines. An Open World Pokemon game could be great...if there was level scaling with trainers and things to do beside battling and cathcing
Non Battle interactions with Pokemon could be great....if the only other option wasn't just throwing Pokeballs.
Pokemon's weakness is that it tries to do too much while not making sure it does anyhing super well. Jack of all Trades style game design
The way I see it, it doesn't need to follow the open world meme, but it doesn't have to go full linear either. But it'd also be folly to expect GF would do anything right currently. They could go back to 2d and they'd still manage to frick everything up.
The problem is manifold >there do not need to be more pokemon when the existing ones are beloved yet stuck with shit models/animations/stats/abilities/noteveninthegame >all new pokemon are also designed in blender first and as products second, doesn't matter if they look like pokemon or not to them >the gameplay is stale with the only element being the stupid type chart which is just rock paper scissors expanded a little bit; taking one look at Bravely Default's battle system proves that turn-based combat can be exciting and innovative >constant dropping of good mechanics like following pokemon, PSS, day/night cycles, megas, z-moves, etc >awful music and formatting in general, trailers and videos have mouse cursors in them showing an all-time low in terms of care and attention to detail >things like dex cut and in PLA the inability to battle other players mean handheld games up to gen 6 actually had MORE complex mechanics in them than cutting edge console games do today
There are tons more problems but these are what I would focus on first
Open world shmopen world, who cares, THE GAMES ARE ALL SHIT REGARLDESS
>open world is bad
No. People have been clamoring for it for years for a reason. GameFreak is the corporate personification of a monkey's paw, however. >SV's open world is bad
Yes. GameFreak cannot into open 3d enviroments with visually appealing detail or decent brushwork, and the Switch hardware isn't helping.
First people said Arceus was the open world experiment, now i'm already seeing people say SV is the open world experiment. By modern Game Freak standards, we'll probably be seeing these experiments for the next few gens to come.
Every game since 2013 has been an "experiment" according to the shills. They will move the goalposts forever before they ever admit that these games are just bad.
I like the freedom of movement, but the "do whatever you want, but there's still actually an order and shit" part is le bad.
I'd rather have an open world that only opens up after you complete the story than a halfway openworld but not really as it is now.
So I skipped 90% of the trainers on purpose, now that I have everything unlocked I bred a team of lvl 1s and am going to do the whole thing as ng+ before the postgame tourney.
Only possible in this structure of game.
Design a 2d map of routes with personality, just like the older gens did.
Now expand it outside of the routes to include "The Wild" where you have your sweeping plains or continued thick forests of the previous games.
NOW, because of the lower power of the switch, Section off areas of the map as Zones with load screens so we can actually up the polycount of areas and not have barren wastelands with a handful of trees. An example being The entire southern portion of the map is one zone, the north is another, east, west, etc.
You play through early game specifically on routes, until you get to the first story beat that gives you a ranger badge that then allows you to explore the wild, so it has a theme.
Now give us Good animations where we can choose our ride pokemon for each "HM" I wanna ride a mantine through the sky, or trot along ontop of my tauros, climb cliffs on a magnezone.
Open World would be a boon for the series if: > The world was believable and natural to traverse. > Levels scale based on progress made. > Actual discovery was allowed and no handholdy garbage
Until that happens, Open-World style Pokemon games will be just as horrendously linear as the hallway games.
Has japan ever made a good open world 3d game? I think their devs couldn’t get evolve past leve based game design or map besided design.
Whenever they try to imitate west open world they just make it as big as possible and bland.
Why post a picture of your post instead of posting it? Is this some screencap from some moron?
Well it's stupid anyway. Unless you're a close minded homosexual then any genre can be good if it's executed well, and if you look at Pokemon it was grid based because of hardware limitations at the start, meanwhile the world was depicted as living and breathing in the anime which is absolutely what most people would want as technology improves. Whether they make it linear or not, the expectation is for the world to get bigger and more detailed, and it's better late than never.
If you want to criticize SV then do it with substance, not open world bad, because that's not even a discussion starter it's just subhuman shitposting.
The problem was never open world and free movement vs hallway and grid movement. It's about having interesting map/landscapes and making traversing it feel satisfying. DP had tons of branching paths on huge routes, with barriers that require you to go out of your way to get the right Pokemon for. It almost felt fun getting lost, free movement wouldn't really change that. In the other side, despite having free movement and somewhat open areas, SM/USUM had probably the most boring routes of any Pokemon game so far because there was frick all in any of them. Ultra Megalopolis slaps you in the face extra hard with that, being a huge city that you can't explore at all, reduced to a hallway and some stairs to reach necrozma. It might as well had just been a corridor from the first game
Pokemon is actually one of the few franchises that would benefit greatly from an open world format. A WELL DESIGNED open world format. Pokemon's problem is not that the open world direction is killing it, but that the people behind it are utterly incompetent: somehow a multi-million dollar franchise can't manage to release a complete game without major bugs or missing content added later through patches, and most if not all their effort seems focused on a few specific gimmicks, how the hell do you expect them to pull off an open world that feels alive and compelling to explore? They can return to linear grids all you want but you're still gonna feel disatisfied because it's not the format that sucks but the amount and quality of content they can fill it with.
I disagree
SV is more like gen 1 in structure than any other generation since.
This
The open world is genuinely a good thing. Now all that's left is making a GOOD open world since SV is unironically the most depressing shit I've ever seen.
Are TMs, some """rare""" items and those fricking useless coins and chests the only reason to explore this shitty overworld? Shit couldn't be any more bland
>Are TMs, some """rare""" items and those fricking useless coins and chests the only reason to explore this shitty overworld?
The primary reason is to find new pokemon. After that, it's to find the stakes to unlock the legendaries.
I really liked it but I got the movement abilities bar glide first thing so I probably had a different experience than you did.
I got all of the movement abilities before the 3rd gym and I still hated it. In fact, it bored me even harder. When you move so goddamn fast in a bland overworld, every location feels the exact same shit. At least when walking you get to figure out which one is the best path and end up appreciating the world a little more
I pretty much spent the remaining part of the game rushing from one place to the other while climbing and gliding through everything
I'm having similar problems. Something about it is just kind of boring me and I love both Pokemon and open world games.
The clusterfrick of Pokemon just spawning all around you and forcing you into battle gets so annoying. Funny because people complained about being forced to battle trainers before, but this feels so much worse. Hunting for TM material really isn't appealing especially with how long they've been infinite use. This seems out of place canonically and mechanically. Crafting is great, but not for just TMs.
TMs are craftable now
you have to put your Pokémon into Let’s Go mode and gather enough materials to be allowed to make a TM
>Are TMs, some """rare""" items and those fricking useless coins and chests the only reason to explore this shitty overworld? Shit couldn't be any more bland
what did you honestly expect? EVERY open world game is like that.
the concept of open world is fricking the industry in general. pokémon's not special
Breath of the Wild saved videogames
I fricking hated BOTW and I am glad SquareEnix is still pushing JRPGs that are not open world
>!
OP is a troll poster
No
No, grid-based game design is outdated and unpopular. As you've seen in BDSP they can't even make it work properly with analog movement and 3D models. It's unnatural, restrictive, and not credible any more from a worldbuilding perspective.
Absolutely not, the problem with BPSD was not that, but the chibi design of the NPCs, the total absence of Platinum content and the fact that the game is literally Diamond and Pearl without adding anything new!
>the problem with BPSD was not that
Wrong: there are a lot of problems with BDSP and this is undeniably one of them. They struggled so hard to implement free movement in a grid-based restrictive overworked that the player character routinely gets stuck on objects or fails to navigate narrow ledges.
The grids are a vestige of outdated game design and do not work with modern controls.
This because BPSD is a lazy Diamond and Pearl code copypasta, not because hallway-dungeon are a bad game design!
It's a bad game design specifically for modern Pokemon games because it can't be easily paired with free analog movement.
Previous games in the series that used 90 degree grids did so because of hardware limitations. Now that those limitations no longer exist, customers will not accept the same restrictions arbitrarily. You are thinking purely from a nostalgic standpoint.
It would be enough to widen the road below the climb, the fault lies with the laziness of ILCA which limited itself to copy and paste the DP code in the realization of that cave, not of the game design.
>The grids are a vestige of outdated game design and do not work with modern controls.
Not even, grids are fine, but this will happen if you try playing with a joystick instead of the D-Pad like you're supposed to on a grid game.
>the total absence of Platinum content
Wrong. BDSP does have Platinum content.
>and the fact that the game is literally Diamond and Pearl without adding anything new
Wrong. BDSP does have new content.
Dungeons are the best but if the choice is between hallways and open world I'll take open world every time.
The problem ain't open words, it's the gaming industry and the company behind them
No, but it should have dungeons. Bring hideout buildings back.
I don't completely agree. Something is definitely of with S/V on top of all its technical problems.
Legends Arceus seemed so much better, far less buggy, and much more stable. It may have less overall to do, but something about the movement and the theme feels much more natural to the pokemon world.
I do prefer the semi linear structure of the original 2 generations with optional dungeons/challenges along the way though.
Because Legend Arceus is not even an open world game is just open map!
True, it was more of a large zones type structure, but clearly they were going for the openworld style with how large each area was and the absence of routes.
It definitely seemed like a test run an actual open world game.
Pokemon attacking you in overworld are missing.
I will never forget how I entered bravely the abomasnow outbteak as I had 2 fire pokemon but then I got my ass wipes by blizzards before I even started battles.
>grid
no lol
>hallways
Yes, make routes iconic again istead of being a big blob of wide useless area.
Alola was mostly nice (dunno about S/S, didn't get to play those) and I wish we got an upgrade from there istead of openworld
I totally agree with OP. Frick the open world meme.
>The Pokémon franchise is going in the wrong direction!
I agree, but not because of the open world.
Open world, open map, hallway routes, I don't mind any of them as long as they're done well and filled with proper challenges. PLA & SV's worlds are ugly, barren, and unremarkable.
SV also has bosses that don't have level scaling on either side making the ability to go to any of them in any order almost pointless if you start on a mid or end game level boss then just steamroll the rest below it. Most frustratingly, this has been done before in the series. Multiplayer depending on the game can either lower overleveled Pokémon to the set level and the Gym Leader Castle in the Stadium series has the opponents' levels scaled to that of your highest leveled Pokémon if it's above 50.
For me, what's making Pokémon go in the wrong direction is the art direction where style and character designs are an inconsistent eyesore, the music which is nauseating, repetitive, and even more incoherent than the art, and the gameplay where it's a constant tug-o-war over what can carry over, what gets improved, what gets worsened, and what gets removed entirely along with the lack of difficulty and variation of what does remain of it.
considering gamefreak lacks the competence to make a decent game otherwise i agree
Based!
You need to stop replying to your own threads
Yes!
Actually correct, Pokemon games are shat out every single year; that's a massive open world being made over and over. The games were absolutely dogshit on 3DS, and Switch games are noticably lacking compared to others. How long can GameFreak keep up? Next gen console where the standard is raised, while even more development is spent on a mostly empty open world.
Getting rid of the grid is fine, but yes, open worlds are a cancerous tumor on gaming and a disaster for every game that tries them.
>inb4 "They're not bad, they just haven't been done right!"
This excuse is used for every bad idea.
This is the correct opinion. Frick analog movement, frick overworld Pokémon.
Real openworld pokemon could be fun
But this current half-assed semi-linear shitfest without any real feeling of exploration is awful
Gamefreak is not skilled enough to pull of BotW but with pokemon
Correct opinion incoming.
Open world game design is hard and 90% of devs can't make it work in a way that actually benefits the gameplay. GF could barely even make linear game design work well, and considering how lazy and corner cutting they are, they should stick to more basic linear world design since it suits their limitations more. The best parts of SWSH were the linear routes and towns.
This isn't the W you think it is, yawngay.
This isn't the yawngay you think it is, newbie. Go lurk more.
t. yawning homosexual
God no, if something this is what the series needed, what we need now is bigger and more detailed region (example, forests FORESTS), SV convinced me that this was the right direction, not perfect but this game and Arceus needs to be the foundation for the franchise onwards.
I normally agree that Open world is cancer, but on this particular situation I disagree.
It doesn't matter which direction the games are heading, GF will still frick it up. Yes it's fun to think that GF will make the open world actually good, but they won't. It's better to be realistic about GF and accept their limitations instead of actually thinking they'll improve with time.
If we get another game with these hideous human designs I'm dropping it allthogether, there's not a single design that is actually passable, I can forgive the Pokemon because they are hit an miss and grow in you but the characters... fricking hell both MCs and La Primera are fricking abominations.
Nope, the opposite. You're what's killing the franchise
Theclack of polish, AND THE GAME DESIGN!!! Stupid.
Anon, just stop. I don't even know wtf you're on about, stop being a stupid homosexual
What's ruining Pokemon isn't the game design, it's the lack of polish in these games.
A thousand poorly executed ideas thrown together to meet deadlines. An Open World Pokemon game could be great...if there was level scaling with trainers and things to do beside battling and cathcing
Non Battle interactions with Pokemon could be great....if the only other option wasn't just throwing Pokeballs.
Pokemon's weakness is that it tries to do too much while not making sure it does anyhing super well. Jack of all Trades style game design
>An Open World Pokemon game could be great...if there was level scaling
annnnd just like that you admitted you're a moron.
The way I see it, it doesn't need to follow the open world meme, but it doesn't have to go full linear either. But it'd also be folly to expect GF would do anything right currently. They could go back to 2d and they'd still manage to frick everything up.
Open world is a meme. Pokemon games should be block linear.
It's going in more than four directions that's for sure
XY felt terrible as a 3D game that was grid based
I don't think the open world has any effect OP
The problem is manifold
>there do not need to be more pokemon when the existing ones are beloved yet stuck with shit models/animations/stats/abilities/noteveninthegame
>all new pokemon are also designed in blender first and as products second, doesn't matter if they look like pokemon or not to them
>the gameplay is stale with the only element being the stupid type chart which is just rock paper scissors expanded a little bit; taking one look at Bravely Default's battle system proves that turn-based combat can be exciting and innovative
>constant dropping of good mechanics like following pokemon, PSS, day/night cycles, megas, z-moves, etc
>awful music and formatting in general, trailers and videos have mouse cursors in them showing an all-time low in terms of care and attention to detail
>things like dex cut and in PLA the inability to battle other players mean handheld games up to gen 6 actually had MORE complex mechanics in them than cutting edge console games do today
There are tons more problems but these are what I would focus on first
Open world shmopen world, who cares, THE GAMES ARE ALL SHIT REGARLDESS
>open world is bad
No. People have been clamoring for it for years for a reason. GameFreak is the corporate personification of a monkey's paw, however.
>SV's open world is bad
Yes. GameFreak cannot into open 3d enviroments with visually appealing detail or decent brushwork, and the Switch hardware isn't helping.
First people said Arceus was the open world experiment, now i'm already seeing people say SV is the open world experiment. By modern Game Freak standards, we'll probably be seeing these experiments for the next few gens to come.
Every game since 2013 has been an "experiment" according to the shills. They will move the goalposts forever before they ever admit that these games are just bad.
I like the freedom of movement, but the "do whatever you want, but there's still actually an order and shit" part is le bad.
I'd rather have an open world that only opens up after you complete the story than a halfway openworld but not really as it is now.
fricking nuke BotW from existence, it's done nothing but shit up the entire industry
You sound fat
I despise BOTW, but it's just another symptom. GTA3, Morrowind, Far Cry and especially AssCreed are the true culprits.
I thought this too but elden ring was genuinely good so it worked out
Yeah, it sucks that we're never going to get another real Zelda game after how successful BotW was.
Pokemon is one of the few franchises Open World concepts make sense.
Half-assing "open-world" means that yes, it would be in fact better to go back.
why do bw2gays always have the stupidest takes possible
So I skipped 90% of the trainers on purpose, now that I have everything unlocked I bred a team of lvl 1s and am going to do the whole thing as ng+ before the postgame tourney.
Only possible in this structure of game.
I propose making the games good.
Design a 2d map of routes with personality, just like the older gens did.
Now expand it outside of the routes to include "The Wild" where you have your sweeping plains or continued thick forests of the previous games.
NOW, because of the lower power of the switch, Section off areas of the map as Zones with load screens so we can actually up the polycount of areas and not have barren wastelands with a handful of trees. An example being The entire southern portion of the map is one zone, the north is another, east, west, etc.
You play through early game specifically on routes, until you get to the first story beat that gives you a ranger badge that then allows you to explore the wild, so it has a theme.
Now give us Good animations where we can choose our ride pokemon for each "HM" I wanna ride a mantine through the sky, or trot along ontop of my tauros, climb cliffs on a magnezone.
>Design a 2d map of routes with personality
i.e. turn the maps into a hallway for no reason
no thanks
Build them as hallways, and then fricking branch them out as full open areas just outside of the main path you fricking moron.
>Build them as hallways
why?
So you can actually design an experience rather than just turn the player loose like a child in a sandbox you moron.
>So you can actually design an experience
open world games already are that.
Open World would be a boon for the series if:
> The world was believable and natural to traverse.
> Levels scale based on progress made.
> Actual discovery was allowed and no handholdy garbage
Until that happens, Open-World style Pokemon games will be just as horrendously linear as the hallway games.
scale
I love it when people say this because it instantly lets you know their opinion isn't worth listening to
No.
Minecraft pokemon mods confirms Pokemon as a game is MADE for Open World.
But Minecraft is not made by Game Freak.
Has japan ever made a good open world 3d game? I think their devs couldn’t get evolve past leve based game design or map besided design.
Whenever they try to imitate west open world they just make it as big as possible and bland.
Pokemon was never (NEVER!) good at grid-based maps. If anything open world works in it's favor.
What's a "good" grid based game then?
I love how people who claim this can never actually explain how the older map design is good
Good idea.
Frick yeah!
Why post a picture of your post instead of posting it? Is this some screencap from some moron?
Well it's stupid anyway. Unless you're a close minded homosexual then any genre can be good if it's executed well, and if you look at Pokemon it was grid based because of hardware limitations at the start, meanwhile the world was depicted as living and breathing in the anime which is absolutely what most people would want as technology improves. Whether they make it linear or not, the expectation is for the world to get bigger and more detailed, and it's better late than never.
If you want to criticize SV then do it with substance, not open world bad, because that's not even a discussion starter it's just subhuman shitposting.
>Gamefreak is doing the open world badly so that means we have to 180 and completely abandon the concept all together
Peak conservitard mindset
Yep
The problem was never open world and free movement vs hallway and grid movement. It's about having interesting map/landscapes and making traversing it feel satisfying. DP had tons of branching paths on huge routes, with barriers that require you to go out of your way to get the right Pokemon for. It almost felt fun getting lost, free movement wouldn't really change that. In the other side, despite having free movement and somewhat open areas, SM/USUM had probably the most boring routes of any Pokemon game so far because there was frick all in any of them. Ultra Megalopolis slaps you in the face extra hard with that, being a huge city that you can't explore at all, reduced to a hallway and some stairs to reach necrozma. It might as well had just been a corridor from the first game
Pokemon is actually one of the few franchises that would benefit greatly from an open world format. A WELL DESIGNED open world format. Pokemon's problem is not that the open world direction is killing it, but that the people behind it are utterly incompetent: somehow a multi-million dollar franchise can't manage to release a complete game without major bugs or missing content added later through patches, and most if not all their effort seems focused on a few specific gimmicks, how the hell do you expect them to pull off an open world that feels alive and compelling to explore? They can return to linear grids all you want but you're still gonna feel disatisfied because it's not the format that sucks but the amount and quality of content they can fill it with.