[Duddy]

As someone who hasn't commented so far may I just say;

I don't think either side really has much in the way of a justification.

Most of those against it seem to disregarding any ideas simply due to their prejudice to the original implementation. To make an analogy, they act like the people who denounce Nuclear power due to what happened at Fukushima.

Despite the fact it was mismanagement that caused the issue, people still relate their ill will to Nuclear power itself, which means they tend to glaze over any positive attributes. Much how people "hurt" by the poor implementation of BFRs by the PS1 team refuse to even acknowledge anything similar for PS2.

As for those for their implementation, it doesn't seem like many can realistically come up with a good reason for inclusion.

Without a solid reason, and I mean a gap it fills naturally rather than one created by players, then how can one possibly argue for their addition? Furthermore, if you wanted to identify a gap then you'd probably need to wait until the game was being played to find it. You can do all the theoretical talk but, as has been evidenced in previous games, unintentional/missing features will emerge through gameplay.

To conclude, neither side seems to have a solid reason for or against, nor do we have a meaningful way to asses validity either way. Perhaps you should just both disagree for now and agree to re-evaluate the situation once we have the game to actually assess the situation.