But see, that is what other people call "casualization" (I don't know why mechanical, feedback or layout impediments or inadequacies "casualize" anything, but, oh, well...). Some, and that might be more true, would just calling it "selling out to the mainstream", which on the one hand I can see very well how it can alienate long time fans, but on the other hand is just stupid. It's like this "I did this before it was cool" and we should add "I want people polishing my ego, and treating me like a pro-video-athlete".
See, I feel that when someone has a project, and a project that major developers have rejected when proposed, these someones have to get it done with the means they have (as long as it's not the worst possible way of doing it). Isometric gets it done. It attracts people through nostalgia, but what's bad about it? It's based on a 23 year old franchise that ships new editions faster than the very DnD. If nostalgia alone is such bad a thing, maybe we should ban franchising and or rebooting as a thing that only serves a purpose of monetizing an old idea some producer happens to have the exploitation rights to.
Also, turn based, grid based is right at home in the genre. The very pnp is turn bases, so it's genuine. Also, I feel that it helps strategy. I myself prefer advance wars, ff tactics, wesnoth and the like to age of empires, starcraft or warcraft. And, while this is "drawn" tiles and 3d models, I would like someone to try and make something similar with pre-rendered graphics, simply because they had a distinct taste. So, what is more legitimate? Making a game so everyone likes it or make it so that at least some people that wouldn't otherwise like games, or games these days would have a chance at finding their thing?
You also say they are ruining the industry. I would say "no, they aren't, period", but I'm more intrigued as how do you think this is happening.
