Any weird/controversial opinions? I’ll start. Before the remake, the best version of Resident Evil 4 was the Wii version. The Wiimote controls old Resi’s tank controls better than any other controller at the time. The PC version had a bunch of little bugs and detractors that the Wii version just doesn’t have.
I’ll extend this by saying that the Wiimote is actually pretty damn good for shooters, and particularly good for accessibility. Not having to cramp up my hands to press buttons is awesome for having arthritis. Aiming with the Wiimote and moving with the nunchuck just feel really natural, you barely have to move your fingers for anything.
I like random encounters in JRPG. Having enemies that I can avoid all the time (DQ11) removes the challenge and fun.
In earlier DQ games I enjoyed exploring new locations, taking the risks of being wiped by stronger enemies. In DQ11 there is no risk and no reward.
I think this sometimes, too. But at the same time, I gotta admit there is some feel of convenience with not having random encounters. It can be tedious sometimes when you’re just trying to do something and you have to keep doing battles at regular intervals. Eg, revisiting a low level area would be soooo boring because the battles are absolutely trivial and unrewarding and just get in the way.
Perhaps something to be said about the hybrid systems like Persona 5 have, where the battles aren’t random, but rather there’s enemy indicators that you have to touch to start a battle. So you can avoid battles, but if you’re not careful, you’ll still end up in a battle. In fact by preemptively accepting the battle, you can gain an advantage (and inversely, if you’re not careful, you’ll get ambushed).
I like the system of Earthbound where enemies need to touch you to start a battle and if you’re overleveled, the battle is skipped and you still gain exp and items
Yes. And I like that when the enemies are stronger, they actively chase you so you can’t always avoid the battles.